What do you think?
Rate this book
Saving the Planet Without the Bullsh*t: What They Don't Tell You About the Climate Crisis
'Fast paced and energetic'
Financial Times
'Punchy, provocative and wonderfully readable' - David Shukman
'Eye-popping and essential' - Rowan Hooper
'A must-read' - Peter Stott
Have you heard that you should plant trees to save the planet? Or buy carbon offsets when you fly? Or recycle plastic? Go vegan? Or not have children? What if all these actions were a distraction, no matter how well-intentioned?
In this provocative manifesto, Assaad Razzouk shows that for too long our ideas about what's best for the environment have been unfocused and distracted, trying to go in too many directions and concentrating on individual behaviour. While some of these things can be useful, they are dwarfed by one big thing that simply has to happen very soon if we're to avoid major environmental curtailing the activities of the fossil fuel industry.
Full of counter-intuitive statistics and positive suggestions for individual and collective action, this ingenious book will change how you view the climate crisis.
'Punchy, provocative and wonderfully readable' - David Shukman
'Eye-popping and essential' - Rowan Hooper
'A must-read' - Peter Stott
Have you heard that you should plant trees to save the planet? Or buy carbon offsets when you fly? Or recycle plastic? Go vegan? Or not have children? What if all these actions were a distraction, no matter how well-intentioned?
In this provocative manifesto, Assaad Razzouk shows that for too long our ideas about what's best for the environment have been unfocused and distracted, trying to go in too many directions and concentrating on individual behaviour. While some of these things can be useful, they are dwarfed by one big thing that simply has to happen very soon if we're to avoid major environmental curtailing the activities of the fossil fuel industry.
Full of counter-intuitive statistics and positive suggestions for individual and collective action, this ingenious book will change how you view the climate crisis.
309 pages, Kindle Edition
Published September 1, 2022
36 people are currently reading
455 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 29 of 29 reviews
April 16, 2024
This book focuses on identifying the major culprits of carbon emissions and how to reduce same. The main takeaway is that the most effective change will always come from the top not from the bottom.
October 30, 2022
Enough is enough. Its time change the conversation.
Im not an avid non fic reader but this book is really interesting, the way it was told in this no nonsensical's voice stated facts that are meant to be talked about without any embellishments. Just facts, and no bullshit. There are a lot of information particularly on environmental acts, laws, and how oil, coal and gas companies are the real major contributor to climate change.
Its not just about recycling, reduce flight times, not having babies, go vegan, no, these are small steps yet it can only make small changes if the major companies still making their decision to pollute the environment by burning oil, gas and coal. THIS ARE WHAT NEED TO BE CHANGED .
Severe climate change caused negative affects to the whole population. Having solutions are good but if they doesnt get executed well, it still doesnt make any difference. When it comes to saving the planet, collective efforts need to be done with individuals, society and especially big oil companies need to step up for better improvement and laternative for oil and gas that are sustainable and environmental friendly. This topic needs to be systemised and scrutinized for a better change. Pressure needs to be put on the corporations to do the right thing thus making bigger impact to the world. Individual actions commited by us such as not using plastic, trying to be more conscious on go green may motivate others to do the same but the bigger responsibility lies on the large companies like oil, gas and coal to solve the crisis. With that, our planet may still have hope to be saved.
Im not an avid non fic reader but this book is really interesting, the way it was told in this no nonsensical's voice stated facts that are meant to be talked about without any embellishments. Just facts, and no bullshit. There are a lot of information particularly on environmental acts, laws, and how oil, coal and gas companies are the real major contributor to climate change.
Its not just about recycling, reduce flight times, not having babies, go vegan, no, these are small steps yet it can only make small changes if the major companies still making their decision to pollute the environment by burning oil, gas and coal. THIS ARE WHAT NEED TO BE CHANGED .
Severe climate change caused negative affects to the whole population. Having solutions are good but if they doesnt get executed well, it still doesnt make any difference. When it comes to saving the planet, collective efforts need to be done with individuals, society and especially big oil companies need to step up for better improvement and laternative for oil and gas that are sustainable and environmental friendly. This topic needs to be systemised and scrutinized for a better change. Pressure needs to be put on the corporations to do the right thing thus making bigger impact to the world. Individual actions commited by us such as not using plastic, trying to be more conscious on go green may motivate others to do the same but the bigger responsibility lies on the large companies like oil, gas and coal to solve the crisis. With that, our planet may still have hope to be saved.
August 31, 2022
‘We must resist oil, gas and coal companies trying to shift the burden for solving the climate crisis to individuals. Instead, we must compel them to assume their immensely larger responsibility.’
Razzouk’s frank and frustrated rancour against the duplicity and mendacity of Big Oil, is well argued and justified throughout this entirely readable journey through the unwieldy narratives we have about the climate crisis and the systematic change that is desperately required.
As a clean-energy entrepreneur and high-profile climate communicator, his extensive knowledge and experience, as well as sardonic tone, are brought to bear in this message about demystifying and simplifying the multitude of climate messages and reducing the main focus to a simple, clear few aims.
In the opening five chapters, he adroitly sets the scene and concisely describes the state of the environmental world in which we live. He ends this section with a topical and provocative examination of the systematic change that is required and argues that capitalism does not have to be the villain. In each chapter, he carefully explains the problem, before outlining simple solutions, which are not naïve, but which are heavily delayed by oil, gas and coal companies who see the end of their profits in these markets. Razzouk then leads us to where our focus should be and the positive steps that we can take, before circling back to his central, repeated message that for too long, oil, gas and coal companies have been expert at abnegating their responsibility and have controlled the ‘consumer responsibility’ narrative to shine the focus away from their actions.
Tragically, Razzouk begins with his personal experiences of climate change-fuelled destruction and lists Pakistan as being heavily impacted. 'I witnessed the incredible vulnerability of Thailand, the Philippines, Indonesia, China, India and Pakistan to floods.’ With over a thousand dead and over 30 million people being affected over the last few weeks in the most recent flooding in Pakistan, it serves as a sad reminder that history repeats the cycle until it is broken. ‘Today it’s Pakistan. Tomorrow, it could be your country.’ were the words of the UN Secretary General, António Guterres, to remind the world that climate change needs our attention.
Razzouk makes it clear in his introduction that, ‘It’s time to change the conversation.’ He does not shy away from pointing the finger firmly at polluting companies and decries the ongoing strategies of Big Oil companies, arguing that they haven’t learned from past behaviour. ‘The fact that Shell, still has the gall to try and mislead the public shows that the road ahead continues to be paved with the bad intentions of wealthy and destructive corporations.’ Throughout this book, the author attempts to offset the pressure on individuals to change their behaviour and does focus more on corporations and companies. He does not criticise individuals for their changes in lifestyle, but urges that these, by and of themselves, will not bring down the rising emissions swiftly enough to reduce the climate impact as soon as we can. ‘Individual action, while good and important from a moral standpoint, makes little actual difference and may even be counter-productive in some cases. We are in critical need of major systemic changes.’
Razzouk challenges the need for a plastic pervasive society and argues that this has been created to benefit gas and oil companies. He comments that, ‘We eat, drink and breathe plastic because it’s a waste product of the oil and gas industry and because of the obscene money that has been made available to petrochemical companies to manufacture a lot more of it, insanely cheaply.’ Their need for money has become the hazard to our environment. He examines in depth the hazards of plastic pollution, fast fashion, mass industrial fishing, the exporting of recycling to developing countries, with an ‘out of sight and out of mind’ mentality, the damage caused by air pollution, the environmental impact of fracking and all the time, highlights the only beneficiaries of such a system. ‘It really is an extraordinary gig: unleash poisonous pollutants everywhere, free of charge, and make lots if money doing it.’
Boycotting doesn’t work
As the book develops, Razzouk highlights one of the main difficulties with customer led action- that boycotting products doesn’t work. In the case of plastics, or palm oil, the reach of these products as ingredients is so great, that customers could not have the knowledge to avoid them all sufficiently enough to put pressure on companies to change. Legislation and regulation need to be strong and powerful. Razzouk advocates for accountability, transparency and responsibility from directors of oil and gas companies, which does not seem unreasonable. ‘If the directors were held legally responsible for the environmental harm caused by their supply chains and as a result insurance companies stopped covering environmental destruction in their policies, everything would change overnight.’ He argues that the default positions for companies, corporations and countries should be sustainability or cutting carbon emissions- that these, should not be ‘targets’, but that prevention is better than the cure and that this should be the starting position for any decision-making process.
Fresh air is a myth
Thankfully, awareness and information about air pollution has been growing, so Razzouk’s chapter on it comes as no real surprise. Air pollution is a global killer. He states that, ‘The fundamental driver of air pollution is the burning of fossil fuels over the past 150 years, using the air as a free garbage can.’ He once again zeroes in on the fossil fuel companies who have given no thought to the consequences of their product and instead have focused on short- term company gain, at the expense of everyone else. This is a repeated message, that oil and gas companies have been given free rein to pollute and abuse eco-systems and now that attention is focused on them, they attempt to switch responsibility onto the individual consumer, with their ‘carbon-footprints’.
Overthrowing Capitalism Is A Waste of Time
Up to this point in the text, Razzouk sets the scene and lays out solutions clearly and carefully. We then come to one of the two chapters which I found personally challenging and provocative. Chapter 6, ‘We Don’t Have Time to Overthrow Capitalism’, came as a shock, as Razzouk had been suggesting radical system change in earlier chapters. Indeed, he begins this chapter by stating, ‘Only capitalism is likely to provide the answers to the climate emergency.’ What he does in this chapter is highlight that any ideologies or narratives that take us away from the central goal of reducing emissions, should be discarded as a waste of time and energy. He sets out the challenge that those who call for degrowth and system change are not perhaps being as practical as they could be. He suggests that no alternatives are suggested to replace capitalism and changing the system for multiple countries around the world would be counter-productive. ‘Instead of naively calling for the abolition of capitalism, we should focus on holding companies to their commitments and pushing more towards sustainability, whether in the production of goods or the supply…Capitalism is perfectly suited to regulate the system from within.’ Razzouk cautions about falling into narrative and ideological traps which distract from the main goal of reducing emissions. He states that the broad church of the climate movement is too broad and that it is ‘unwieldy and unfocused.’ He notes that as long as this is the case, polluting companies will continue to prosper. He highlights in this chapter that abolishing fossil fuel subsidies would be a powerful method of dismantling the fossil fuel juggernaut. ‘Yet according to the International Monetary Fund (IMF), we continue to this day to subsidize the production and burning of coal, oil and gas to the extent of $5.9 trillion, or 6.8 per cent of global gross domestic product. That’s $11 million every minute of every day paid to Big Oil to make the climate emergency more acute.’
Solutions
Razzouk is clear on solutions. ‘We need to build circular economies.’ He explores the benefits of ‘green’ hydrogen, compared to ‘black’ and ‘blue’ hydrogen, though admits that ‘we’re not there yet.’ He is clear that change can happen very quickly and cites as an example of this, the global response to the dangers of CFCs. He makes the persuasive point that nuclear power ‘is so over’ and that there hasn’t really been growth in this industry over the last 30 years. Storage of waste, subsidies for the industry, the significant use of water and the cost implications of nuclear power are all examined fully. Again, Razzouk cuts through the noise and simplifies the issue. ‘But we know what we have to do to fight climate change. We have to stop using fossil fuels-oil, gas and coal- by 2050. We know how to do that: we need to decarbonize our economies and lifestyles using clean and green energy.’
He advocates for more climate litigation, though later warns that law firms may risk their ‘green’ reputation if they continue to have fossil fuel companies as clients. Razzouk outlines the dangers of ‘greenwashing’ done by companies in their efforts to ‘look good’ and states that carbon offsets and tree-planting have been used repeatedly in bad faith by companies. ‘Hundreds of thousands of companies think that they can continue doing what they do while generating carbon emissions and looking great doing it.’
The inexorable rise of emissions has continued with the obfuscation of fossil fuel companies over the last four decades. Razzouk’s point is that ‘The last time the atmosphere contained this much CO2 was more than three million years ago, at a time when global sea levels were several metres higher than they are today…We are now fast moving towards 450 PPM…We add approximately 3 PPM each year, so to reach 450 will take just 10 more years.’
By 2032 then, we could be living in a world of 450 PPM, if the rise continues at the same rate.
How do we avoid this?
Razzouk uses history to set out a successful strategy to avoid this potential future.
1) Crystallise and zoom in on Big Oil
2) Have a single compelling message (ideally positive)
3) Have a coherent movement that has clear goals
4) Convince the public that the cost of effecting change is low
5) Create stable institutions that can give the message permanence.
Razzouk believes that having this clear focus on the ‘Nasty Ninety’ companies responsible for two thirds of the harmful emissions generated since the industrial age began, can help campaigners coalesce around narrower objectives. He chooses not to be distracted by other messages such as flight shaming, or the choice of having children, or the choice of veganism, or even taking flights. His view appears to be that these individual actions are morally laudable, but that they don’t effect the necessary change for emissions to be reduced by the fossil fuel companies. ‘Don’t lose focus on the fight that really matters: phasing out our existing oil, gas and coal use as soon as possible and stopping deforestation. Both are driven by big corporations with no moral compass that desperately need to be more regulated to be responsible.’
As a climate communicator, Razzouk finishes on the interesting point about how information about climate news is presented by the media and how it is received by the public. He compares the coverage of the failure of biodiversity, with more ‘positive’ news stories of royal babies or celebrity lives. He closes with two powerful images: one, if health warnings appeared of diesel-powered buses and cars, plastic products, gas stations, ships and planes. When Big Tobacco was forced to label their products with ‘Smoking Kills’, the propaganda spell was broken. This could be the same for the oil, gas and coal companies. ‘Fossil Fuels Kill.’ Secondly, he again uses the tobacco industry as an example and imagines oil executives from ExxonMobil testifying in court that they had knowing misled the public, with the possible bankruptcy this could bring to the companies.
With the rise in climate litigation around the world, surely this day may not seem too far off.
Don’t be distracted- be prepared to cut through the noise and focus on narrow objectives. Make those responsible for the continued rise in carbon emissions actually responsible.
Instead, of a conflicted unwieldy climate community, sometimes at odds with itself, Razzouk reminds us that we have a common enemy, as well as a common aim.
At present, what we are doing in terms of reducing emissions?
‘It’s not enough’.
Razzouk’s frank and frustrated rancour against the duplicity and mendacity of Big Oil, is well argued and justified throughout this entirely readable journey through the unwieldy narratives we have about the climate crisis and the systematic change that is desperately required.
As a clean-energy entrepreneur and high-profile climate communicator, his extensive knowledge and experience, as well as sardonic tone, are brought to bear in this message about demystifying and simplifying the multitude of climate messages and reducing the main focus to a simple, clear few aims.
In the opening five chapters, he adroitly sets the scene and concisely describes the state of the environmental world in which we live. He ends this section with a topical and provocative examination of the systematic change that is required and argues that capitalism does not have to be the villain. In each chapter, he carefully explains the problem, before outlining simple solutions, which are not naïve, but which are heavily delayed by oil, gas and coal companies who see the end of their profits in these markets. Razzouk then leads us to where our focus should be and the positive steps that we can take, before circling back to his central, repeated message that for too long, oil, gas and coal companies have been expert at abnegating their responsibility and have controlled the ‘consumer responsibility’ narrative to shine the focus away from their actions.
Tragically, Razzouk begins with his personal experiences of climate change-fuelled destruction and lists Pakistan as being heavily impacted. 'I witnessed the incredible vulnerability of Thailand, the Philippines, Indonesia, China, India and Pakistan to floods.’ With over a thousand dead and over 30 million people being affected over the last few weeks in the most recent flooding in Pakistan, it serves as a sad reminder that history repeats the cycle until it is broken. ‘Today it’s Pakistan. Tomorrow, it could be your country.’ were the words of the UN Secretary General, António Guterres, to remind the world that climate change needs our attention.
Razzouk makes it clear in his introduction that, ‘It’s time to change the conversation.’ He does not shy away from pointing the finger firmly at polluting companies and decries the ongoing strategies of Big Oil companies, arguing that they haven’t learned from past behaviour. ‘The fact that Shell, still has the gall to try and mislead the public shows that the road ahead continues to be paved with the bad intentions of wealthy and destructive corporations.’ Throughout this book, the author attempts to offset the pressure on individuals to change their behaviour and does focus more on corporations and companies. He does not criticise individuals for their changes in lifestyle, but urges that these, by and of themselves, will not bring down the rising emissions swiftly enough to reduce the climate impact as soon as we can. ‘Individual action, while good and important from a moral standpoint, makes little actual difference and may even be counter-productive in some cases. We are in critical need of major systemic changes.’
Razzouk challenges the need for a plastic pervasive society and argues that this has been created to benefit gas and oil companies. He comments that, ‘We eat, drink and breathe plastic because it’s a waste product of the oil and gas industry and because of the obscene money that has been made available to petrochemical companies to manufacture a lot more of it, insanely cheaply.’ Their need for money has become the hazard to our environment. He examines in depth the hazards of plastic pollution, fast fashion, mass industrial fishing, the exporting of recycling to developing countries, with an ‘out of sight and out of mind’ mentality, the damage caused by air pollution, the environmental impact of fracking and all the time, highlights the only beneficiaries of such a system. ‘It really is an extraordinary gig: unleash poisonous pollutants everywhere, free of charge, and make lots if money doing it.’
Boycotting doesn’t work
As the book develops, Razzouk highlights one of the main difficulties with customer led action- that boycotting products doesn’t work. In the case of plastics, or palm oil, the reach of these products as ingredients is so great, that customers could not have the knowledge to avoid them all sufficiently enough to put pressure on companies to change. Legislation and regulation need to be strong and powerful. Razzouk advocates for accountability, transparency and responsibility from directors of oil and gas companies, which does not seem unreasonable. ‘If the directors were held legally responsible for the environmental harm caused by their supply chains and as a result insurance companies stopped covering environmental destruction in their policies, everything would change overnight.’ He argues that the default positions for companies, corporations and countries should be sustainability or cutting carbon emissions- that these, should not be ‘targets’, but that prevention is better than the cure and that this should be the starting position for any decision-making process.
Fresh air is a myth
Thankfully, awareness and information about air pollution has been growing, so Razzouk’s chapter on it comes as no real surprise. Air pollution is a global killer. He states that, ‘The fundamental driver of air pollution is the burning of fossil fuels over the past 150 years, using the air as a free garbage can.’ He once again zeroes in on the fossil fuel companies who have given no thought to the consequences of their product and instead have focused on short- term company gain, at the expense of everyone else. This is a repeated message, that oil and gas companies have been given free rein to pollute and abuse eco-systems and now that attention is focused on them, they attempt to switch responsibility onto the individual consumer, with their ‘carbon-footprints’.
Overthrowing Capitalism Is A Waste of Time
Up to this point in the text, Razzouk sets the scene and lays out solutions clearly and carefully. We then come to one of the two chapters which I found personally challenging and provocative. Chapter 6, ‘We Don’t Have Time to Overthrow Capitalism’, came as a shock, as Razzouk had been suggesting radical system change in earlier chapters. Indeed, he begins this chapter by stating, ‘Only capitalism is likely to provide the answers to the climate emergency.’ What he does in this chapter is highlight that any ideologies or narratives that take us away from the central goal of reducing emissions, should be discarded as a waste of time and energy. He sets out the challenge that those who call for degrowth and system change are not perhaps being as practical as they could be. He suggests that no alternatives are suggested to replace capitalism and changing the system for multiple countries around the world would be counter-productive. ‘Instead of naively calling for the abolition of capitalism, we should focus on holding companies to their commitments and pushing more towards sustainability, whether in the production of goods or the supply…Capitalism is perfectly suited to regulate the system from within.’ Razzouk cautions about falling into narrative and ideological traps which distract from the main goal of reducing emissions. He states that the broad church of the climate movement is too broad and that it is ‘unwieldy and unfocused.’ He notes that as long as this is the case, polluting companies will continue to prosper. He highlights in this chapter that abolishing fossil fuel subsidies would be a powerful method of dismantling the fossil fuel juggernaut. ‘Yet according to the International Monetary Fund (IMF), we continue to this day to subsidize the production and burning of coal, oil and gas to the extent of $5.9 trillion, or 6.8 per cent of global gross domestic product. That’s $11 million every minute of every day paid to Big Oil to make the climate emergency more acute.’
Solutions
Razzouk is clear on solutions. ‘We need to build circular economies.’ He explores the benefits of ‘green’ hydrogen, compared to ‘black’ and ‘blue’ hydrogen, though admits that ‘we’re not there yet.’ He is clear that change can happen very quickly and cites as an example of this, the global response to the dangers of CFCs. He makes the persuasive point that nuclear power ‘is so over’ and that there hasn’t really been growth in this industry over the last 30 years. Storage of waste, subsidies for the industry, the significant use of water and the cost implications of nuclear power are all examined fully. Again, Razzouk cuts through the noise and simplifies the issue. ‘But we know what we have to do to fight climate change. We have to stop using fossil fuels-oil, gas and coal- by 2050. We know how to do that: we need to decarbonize our economies and lifestyles using clean and green energy.’
He advocates for more climate litigation, though later warns that law firms may risk their ‘green’ reputation if they continue to have fossil fuel companies as clients. Razzouk outlines the dangers of ‘greenwashing’ done by companies in their efforts to ‘look good’ and states that carbon offsets and tree-planting have been used repeatedly in bad faith by companies. ‘Hundreds of thousands of companies think that they can continue doing what they do while generating carbon emissions and looking great doing it.’
The inexorable rise of emissions has continued with the obfuscation of fossil fuel companies over the last four decades. Razzouk’s point is that ‘The last time the atmosphere contained this much CO2 was more than three million years ago, at a time when global sea levels were several metres higher than they are today…We are now fast moving towards 450 PPM…We add approximately 3 PPM each year, so to reach 450 will take just 10 more years.’
By 2032 then, we could be living in a world of 450 PPM, if the rise continues at the same rate.
How do we avoid this?
Razzouk uses history to set out a successful strategy to avoid this potential future.
1) Crystallise and zoom in on Big Oil
2) Have a single compelling message (ideally positive)
3) Have a coherent movement that has clear goals
4) Convince the public that the cost of effecting change is low
5) Create stable institutions that can give the message permanence.
Razzouk believes that having this clear focus on the ‘Nasty Ninety’ companies responsible for two thirds of the harmful emissions generated since the industrial age began, can help campaigners coalesce around narrower objectives. He chooses not to be distracted by other messages such as flight shaming, or the choice of having children, or the choice of veganism, or even taking flights. His view appears to be that these individual actions are morally laudable, but that they don’t effect the necessary change for emissions to be reduced by the fossil fuel companies. ‘Don’t lose focus on the fight that really matters: phasing out our existing oil, gas and coal use as soon as possible and stopping deforestation. Both are driven by big corporations with no moral compass that desperately need to be more regulated to be responsible.’
As a climate communicator, Razzouk finishes on the interesting point about how information about climate news is presented by the media and how it is received by the public. He compares the coverage of the failure of biodiversity, with more ‘positive’ news stories of royal babies or celebrity lives. He closes with two powerful images: one, if health warnings appeared of diesel-powered buses and cars, plastic products, gas stations, ships and planes. When Big Tobacco was forced to label their products with ‘Smoking Kills’, the propaganda spell was broken. This could be the same for the oil, gas and coal companies. ‘Fossil Fuels Kill.’ Secondly, he again uses the tobacco industry as an example and imagines oil executives from ExxonMobil testifying in court that they had knowing misled the public, with the possible bankruptcy this could bring to the companies.
With the rise in climate litigation around the world, surely this day may not seem too far off.
Don’t be distracted- be prepared to cut through the noise and focus on narrow objectives. Make those responsible for the continued rise in carbon emissions actually responsible.
Instead, of a conflicted unwieldy climate community, sometimes at odds with itself, Razzouk reminds us that we have a common enemy, as well as a common aim.
At present, what we are doing in terms of reducing emissions?
‘It’s not enough’.
October 14, 2023
This one was interesting on a number of levels - arguing that we can end up doing nothing when confronted with all the ways to help stop climate change but that while individual actions are all well and good, the real issue is sorting out the coal, oil and gas companies. It says that just 90 companies are responsible for two thirds of all greenhouse gas emissions since industrialisation began and all of them are oil, gas, coal or cement companies. We just need to change their behaviour and everything else will follow.
Interesting on carbon offsets too.
Definitely worth a read.
Interesting on carbon offsets too.
Definitely worth a read.
July 9, 2023
Mostly the same few points repeated ad infinitum. Some interesting facts though and the chapter on bitcoin was particularly enlightening.
August 30, 2023
Entertaining and easy to read, this polemic nevertheless packs in a lot of interesting and thought-provoking information at a pretty brisk pace. Whilst the book is structured around 28 individual topics, it manages to develop a quite convincing overall thesis, namely that the environmental movement would be better off concentrating its disparate energies on the main culprits of the climate crisis, namely the fossil fuel industry, forcing them to be legally liable for the costs they have incurred on global society.
The extent to which they have hitherto escaped such a reckoning is staggering, and this has been achieved over several decades with the direct and active collusion of governments, and the insurance and legal industries.
I was not always convinced by Razzouk's recommendations – for example, he predictably enough extols the benefits of cycling, as well as convincingly demonstrates the appalling environmental impact of cruise liners, but a couple of chapters later seems to be completely fine with unlimited personal airline travel, on the grounds that individuals shouldn't be punished for the airline industry's failure to develop battery-powered flight during the last few decades. Erm, ok?
Overall though this is a great read, and should inspire not just anger but hope as well - the massive progress made by renewables over the last ten years or so, and their further capacity for growth, is something he describes very well.
The extent to which they have hitherto escaped such a reckoning is staggering, and this has been achieved over several decades with the direct and active collusion of governments, and the insurance and legal industries.
I was not always convinced by Razzouk's recommendations – for example, he predictably enough extols the benefits of cycling, as well as convincingly demonstrates the appalling environmental impact of cruise liners, but a couple of chapters later seems to be completely fine with unlimited personal airline travel, on the grounds that individuals shouldn't be punished for the airline industry's failure to develop battery-powered flight during the last few decades. Erm, ok?
Overall though this is a great read, and should inspire not just anger but hope as well - the massive progress made by renewables over the last ten years or so, and their further capacity for growth, is something he describes very well.
January 21, 2023
Every now and then, there are books coming out in the market on the topic of Climate change and the ensuing crisis, unfolding in its ugliest form today, related with it. Some of the books are good, some are sheer propaganda and some are indeed very great. In the "great" category, there are some books which are hard-hitting and into your face. One of the books falling in this category is 'Saving The Planet Without The Bullshit, What they don't tell you about the Climate Crisis' by 'Assaad Razzouk', a Lebanese-British clean-energy entrepreneur and thought leader.
The strongest point of the book is its readability, crisp chapters peppered with facts, arguments, fact-checks, details, disclosures and very fine exposés. It is divided into 28 chapters, in which has been given a smattering of almost everything related with the issue of Climate Change. Unlike many other books on the topic which focus on the changes to be made by individuals at their own small and intangible levels, this book presses on and on the need for the systemic changes to be ushered in by the governments, the conglomerates, big corporations, fossil fuel behemoths, law firms etc in order to make any sizeable impact on the path to stop the Earth from heating up beyond 2 degree Celsius by the end of this century . This line of argumentation by the author is strongly backed by cutting-edge research, path-breaking reports and a storm of facts.
At the very outset, the book focuses on the city of Taiyuan, in Shanxi province, of China, on its trajectory traversed from embarassed smiles, unrealisable flights, putrid smells and suffocating smoke to the one today with its entire 8,000-strong taxi fleet completely electrified today, the first one to do so in the world. In having achieved it, the author says the city didn't resort to the extreme habitational and behavioral individual choices like going all-vegan, moving off from the animal-based diet, wearing organic clothes, not reproducing children and the related less-practical choices. It did the basic stuff correct, i.e., made proper use renewable energy like solar and wind, focused more on electrification, recycled more , made every ounce of economy circular, acted responsive to the growing environmental protests' demands, promised to build an ecological civilization and did away with siloism in the governance structure through the legislation of a superagency into practice, where all decisions from planning to implementation were coordinated.
Through the subsequent chapters, the book has busted many a myth. It has elaborated on the plastics and microplastics having become an integral part of our life, food and blood, in the process amplifying the concentration of carcinogens in our bodies. The author has called the plastics-into-microplastics the carpet-bombing campaign against the planet Earth and its denizens.The solution suggested is the inclusion of premium in the plastic products and the bioplastics and their easy composting. We have only been able to recycle 7 per cent of the total plastic produced, therefore the way to go is long, fractious and most likely to be obtructed by the big companies. There are some remarkable changes made in this direction like in Rwanda and Singapore, but they are few and far in between.
The author has mentioned the palm oil production mad-rush in south-east Asia having led to the large-scale deforestation of the lush Tropical Evergreen forests and the near-extinction of elephants and Bornean Orangutan there. As is the constant thread throughout the book, the author has stressed on making the oil's production and enabling-will of the Multinational corporations integral to making themselves transparent, legally responsible and making it clear that their imports ain't linked to even a patch of deforestation.
The book has exposed the hollow claims of the mega-brands about their products being eco-friendly and sustainable. In this respect, the author has called the brands like Gucci, Louis Vuitton, Prada, Nike, Adidas etc, all appealing to the emotions of the people, using plastic in the most pervasive way and drooling out around 20 per cent of the global wastewater. While the inconsistencies and gaps are rife, there is a near-eclipse on any disclosure or leakage of information regarding their production-lines, some of the brands like H & M, Nike, Lululemon etc are moving towards using renewable energy in their production and treatment of the wastewater produced by them on a large scale.
In the subsequent chapters, the author has opened threadbare the widespread trends and arguments like not eating fish to let them grow at a steady rate and not understanding that the scale of destruction unleashed by the countries using commercial trawlers, deploying naval intelligence etc; the wider use of corporate social responsibility (CSR) in order to carry out the greenwashing (pretend-doing) projects of afforestation by the businesses of oil, gas and coal; advising people to not have children because that increases the family carbon footprints in the ever-squeezing per capita carbon spaces; not flying because flying is all emissions because of the dirty jet oil; not using air conditioning because it creates heat islands around, and going vegan all the way because the non-veg proteins have higher unaccounted carbon footprints in their prices. While such choices are surely non-negative and helpful in mitigating the impact of climate change crisis on us, the author calls them to be a part of recalcitrant and manipulative walkathon propaganda of the fossil fuel industry.
The author is very resolute about the future belonging to the electric vehicles. He calls them to be a complete break away from the cognitive rigidity of the oil, gas and coal industry companies, who sold us the world where the who-but-you is fossil fuel cars, trucks and trolleys. In it he calls foul to every report, which say that the electric cars are far expensive than the traditional vehicles, without the addition of Environmental premium in the latter and neglecting the carbon improvement curve scenario of the newer electric vehicles.
The book makes a pitch up, when it waxes so very clear on the role of the oil and gas industry in obfuscating the reality of their role in deteriorating the only planet we have. In it, the book talks about the information asymmetry we have been made endure over last 4 decades and a half just because a few people in oil, gas and coal were benefiting. The media, the social media and the law firms being just the vital parts of the larger ecosystem of obfuscation. While there are companies like Danone in France ( food company), which have gone solely ecological and ethical, but the existent business order being so iniquitous that the market has kept punishing the company and its shares. The book warns us that unless the world insurance, finance and banks break their hip connection with each other, there will be more droughts, more migrations, more extreme climate events and the general loss of reliance on the existent and evolving climate research and climate change models available to us.
Seeing the information and urgency of that information in the book, one is surely not done with reading it once. It will need multiple readings to imbibe the depth and the width of this book. Given its butteriness in language, problems on the horizon highlighted, the large-scale untruths purveyed at ease being ripped and the solutions suggested and coming, my rating for the book is 5.0 out of 5.0.
Absolutely loved it.
The strongest point of the book is its readability, crisp chapters peppered with facts, arguments, fact-checks, details, disclosures and very fine exposés. It is divided into 28 chapters, in which has been given a smattering of almost everything related with the issue of Climate Change. Unlike many other books on the topic which focus on the changes to be made by individuals at their own small and intangible levels, this book presses on and on the need for the systemic changes to be ushered in by the governments, the conglomerates, big corporations, fossil fuel behemoths, law firms etc in order to make any sizeable impact on the path to stop the Earth from heating up beyond 2 degree Celsius by the end of this century . This line of argumentation by the author is strongly backed by cutting-edge research, path-breaking reports and a storm of facts.
At the very outset, the book focuses on the city of Taiyuan, in Shanxi province, of China, on its trajectory traversed from embarassed smiles, unrealisable flights, putrid smells and suffocating smoke to the one today with its entire 8,000-strong taxi fleet completely electrified today, the first one to do so in the world. In having achieved it, the author says the city didn't resort to the extreme habitational and behavioral individual choices like going all-vegan, moving off from the animal-based diet, wearing organic clothes, not reproducing children and the related less-practical choices. It did the basic stuff correct, i.e., made proper use renewable energy like solar and wind, focused more on electrification, recycled more , made every ounce of economy circular, acted responsive to the growing environmental protests' demands, promised to build an ecological civilization and did away with siloism in the governance structure through the legislation of a superagency into practice, where all decisions from planning to implementation were coordinated.
Through the subsequent chapters, the book has busted many a myth. It has elaborated on the plastics and microplastics having become an integral part of our life, food and blood, in the process amplifying the concentration of carcinogens in our bodies. The author has called the plastics-into-microplastics the carpet-bombing campaign against the planet Earth and its denizens.The solution suggested is the inclusion of premium in the plastic products and the bioplastics and their easy composting. We have only been able to recycle 7 per cent of the total plastic produced, therefore the way to go is long, fractious and most likely to be obtructed by the big companies. There are some remarkable changes made in this direction like in Rwanda and Singapore, but they are few and far in between.
The author has mentioned the palm oil production mad-rush in south-east Asia having led to the large-scale deforestation of the lush Tropical Evergreen forests and the near-extinction of elephants and Bornean Orangutan there. As is the constant thread throughout the book, the author has stressed on making the oil's production and enabling-will of the Multinational corporations integral to making themselves transparent, legally responsible and making it clear that their imports ain't linked to even a patch of deforestation.
The book has exposed the hollow claims of the mega-brands about their products being eco-friendly and sustainable. In this respect, the author has called the brands like Gucci, Louis Vuitton, Prada, Nike, Adidas etc, all appealing to the emotions of the people, using plastic in the most pervasive way and drooling out around 20 per cent of the global wastewater. While the inconsistencies and gaps are rife, there is a near-eclipse on any disclosure or leakage of information regarding their production-lines, some of the brands like H & M, Nike, Lululemon etc are moving towards using renewable energy in their production and treatment of the wastewater produced by them on a large scale.
In the subsequent chapters, the author has opened threadbare the widespread trends and arguments like not eating fish to let them grow at a steady rate and not understanding that the scale of destruction unleashed by the countries using commercial trawlers, deploying naval intelligence etc; the wider use of corporate social responsibility (CSR) in order to carry out the greenwashing (pretend-doing) projects of afforestation by the businesses of oil, gas and coal; advising people to not have children because that increases the family carbon footprints in the ever-squeezing per capita carbon spaces; not flying because flying is all emissions because of the dirty jet oil; not using air conditioning because it creates heat islands around, and going vegan all the way because the non-veg proteins have higher unaccounted carbon footprints in their prices. While such choices are surely non-negative and helpful in mitigating the impact of climate change crisis on us, the author calls them to be a part of recalcitrant and manipulative walkathon propaganda of the fossil fuel industry.
The author is very resolute about the future belonging to the electric vehicles. He calls them to be a complete break away from the cognitive rigidity of the oil, gas and coal industry companies, who sold us the world where the who-but-you is fossil fuel cars, trucks and trolleys. In it he calls foul to every report, which say that the electric cars are far expensive than the traditional vehicles, without the addition of Environmental premium in the latter and neglecting the carbon improvement curve scenario of the newer electric vehicles.
The book makes a pitch up, when it waxes so very clear on the role of the oil and gas industry in obfuscating the reality of their role in deteriorating the only planet we have. In it, the book talks about the information asymmetry we have been made endure over last 4 decades and a half just because a few people in oil, gas and coal were benefiting. The media, the social media and the law firms being just the vital parts of the larger ecosystem of obfuscation. While there are companies like Danone in France ( food company), which have gone solely ecological and ethical, but the existent business order being so iniquitous that the market has kept punishing the company and its shares. The book warns us that unless the world insurance, finance and banks break their hip connection with each other, there will be more droughts, more migrations, more extreme climate events and the general loss of reliance on the existent and evolving climate research and climate change models available to us.
Seeing the information and urgency of that information in the book, one is surely not done with reading it once. It will need multiple readings to imbibe the depth and the width of this book. Given its butteriness in language, problems on the horizon highlighted, the large-scale untruths purveyed at ease being ripped and the solutions suggested and coming, my rating for the book is 5.0 out of 5.0.
Absolutely loved it.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
March 17, 2024
The author does a terrific job pointing out some of the “bullshit” in the climate change debate. Certainly you can feel the urgency with which he approaches the topic. He peppers the book with interesting facts, for example the true extent of plastics recycling (very little), the density of palm oil production, etc.
That being said, I can’t accept that we can solve the climate crisis exclusively by sanctioning the suppliers of oil, gas and coal. For one, the majority of oil, gas and coal are no longer produced by the Seven Sisters and their ilk (British Petroleum, Total, etc.). The largest deposits are in Venezuelan and the Middle East, dominated by state-owned enterprises that will disregard protest and carry on.
Second, there is so much end consumers can do to reduce their carbon footprint — install solar panels, buy electric vehicles, support the development of onshore and offshore wind in their neighborhoods, travel by bicycle or public transport, etc. In our book club we discussed the similarities of the “drug problem” with the “carbon problem” — if you only go after the producers and dealers you will never solve the problem. You have to reduce demand, not just interdict supply.
So i (and my book club group) were left a bit hanging on exactly what we can do to help the crisis.
That being said, I can’t accept that we can solve the climate crisis exclusively by sanctioning the suppliers of oil, gas and coal. For one, the majority of oil, gas and coal are no longer produced by the Seven Sisters and their ilk (British Petroleum, Total, etc.). The largest deposits are in Venezuelan and the Middle East, dominated by state-owned enterprises that will disregard protest and carry on.
Second, there is so much end consumers can do to reduce their carbon footprint — install solar panels, buy electric vehicles, support the development of onshore and offshore wind in their neighborhoods, travel by bicycle or public transport, etc. In our book club we discussed the similarities of the “drug problem” with the “carbon problem” — if you only go after the producers and dealers you will never solve the problem. You have to reduce demand, not just interdict supply.
So i (and my book club group) were left a bit hanging on exactly what we can do to help the crisis.
June 25, 2023
The core argument is rather simple, if compelling: fossil fuel companies invented the narrative of the carbon footprint and designed campaigns that place the blame for climate change on our individual consumption habits. Thus, it is a ruse designed to stall action on effective government action such a carbon markets, plastic bans and slashing subsidies for fossil fuels. We should not fall for it then, and instead of castigating ourselves for our holiday flights, steaks and gas guzzlers, we should call for our politicians to act.
Razzouk, a former banker turned energy project developer, offers a nice utopia: cheap, abundant renewable energy that allows many more people to enjoy the same standard of living some of us already have. He's also probably right in that only a small percentage of people can truly be expected to reduce their consumption voluntarily. The few people who do, might gain a feeling of superiority or be able to suppress their guilt, but they alone won't save the world. Pushing for political action to keep carbon in the ground and working on sustainable new technology are probably a better shot. At the end of the day, humans are driven by convenience, so when the market is engineered to deliver the sustainable option at a cheaper price, it will win out.
Razzouk has a readable, entertaining writing style and nicely supports his arguments with useful statistical data. It's worth noting he owns a renewable energy company and is thus possibly somewhat biased. He brushes aside some concerns about wind and solar energy rather nonchalantly, but generally I think his criticisms of Big Coal, Oil and Gas are quite on point.
Razzouk, a former banker turned energy project developer, offers a nice utopia: cheap, abundant renewable energy that allows many more people to enjoy the same standard of living some of us already have. He's also probably right in that only a small percentage of people can truly be expected to reduce their consumption voluntarily. The few people who do, might gain a feeling of superiority or be able to suppress their guilt, but they alone won't save the world. Pushing for political action to keep carbon in the ground and working on sustainable new technology are probably a better shot. At the end of the day, humans are driven by convenience, so when the market is engineered to deliver the sustainable option at a cheaper price, it will win out.
Razzouk has a readable, entertaining writing style and nicely supports his arguments with useful statistical data. It's worth noting he owns a renewable energy company and is thus possibly somewhat biased. He brushes aside some concerns about wind and solar energy rather nonchalantly, but generally I think his criticisms of Big Coal, Oil and Gas are quite on point.
November 18, 2023
Refreshing take on the types of global governance and corporate responsibilities needed to enact realistic and much needed change!
March 17, 2024
Was looking forward to a down to earth book about climate “without the BS”. The book is fast paced, nicely written and covers a very wide range of topics around climate change.
However, towards the end of the book I was puzzled; I found myself very much agreeing with the author on a number of “down to earth” pragmatic opinions around how to deal with climate change, which I thought a breath of fresh air. The author lost me however with his hammering on legally challenging (prosecuting) large energy/ oil companies. Many of the “evangelical” climate activists would probably agree with the author, but myself coming from a more “pragmatic” school could not fully follow the logic of the author.
Still a good read which triggered further thinking!
However, towards the end of the book I was puzzled; I found myself very much agreeing with the author on a number of “down to earth” pragmatic opinions around how to deal with climate change, which I thought a breath of fresh air. The author lost me however with his hammering on legally challenging (prosecuting) large energy/ oil companies. Many of the “evangelical” climate activists would probably agree with the author, but myself coming from a more “pragmatic” school could not fully follow the logic of the author.
Still a good read which triggered further thinking!
January 28, 2024
Very useful book, lots of factual information on different topics in fairly short, pithy chapters. The key message is that the climate crisis can only be effectively tackled via systemic change, and he argues that this is possible even in the short term, giving many examples of strategies that have been successful. He is scornful of a focus on change (and guilt) at an individual and behavioural level, giving evidence that this is a diversionary tactic promoted by the fossil fuel industry and all who 'profit' from it. Includes some glimmers of hope. I think this will be something of a reference book for me - I'll dip back into it when I need info on specific issues.
January 14, 2024
À stzllar book. Absolute must read despite not agreeing with some arguments by the author.
November 16, 2023
As it's title suggests, Razzouk cuts through the bullshit to save you from spiralling into climate guilt; from carbon credits to the arguments that are just wasting breath in the climate fight.
A number of the chapters double up on one another, but I can't fault him for his ability to condense an insane amount of research across the globe into a really accessible read. This is a great starting point for anyone interested in learning about all facets of the climate crisis.
A number of the chapters double up on one another, but I can't fault him for his ability to condense an insane amount of research across the globe into a really accessible read. This is a great starting point for anyone interested in learning about all facets of the climate crisis.
September 3, 2023
"Can't someone else do it?"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZRBH5...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZRBH5...
September 11, 2023
Assaad Razzouk’s self-serving Climate Bullshit book should have been titled “Save the planet without all the bullshit that I don’t like.” This book is so predictable considering the source: a self-made millionaire in renewable energy who obviously flies a lot and eats meat comes out and says the number one thing we should do is stop subsidizing the oil industry (his rival in business) and invest in renewables (his industry) and by the way flying is okay because I fly a lot and because “the industry lied to you” but going vegan isn’t necessary because I like meat and of course capitalism isn’t a problem because without it I wouldn’t be a millionaire and fighting it is a waste of time because stopping capitalism “won’t happen.”
The logic Assaad uses here is easily turned on anything: “Why waste time trying to stop the oil industry? It won’t happen!”
Similar logical errors: "We don't have time to switch everyone to plant-based diets or to stop everyone flying." Really? We don't have the time for that? But we have the time to "just say no" to oil? Practical considerations make our ending of FF use a decades-long goal (we have to eat, heat our homes, cook, etc). Assaad is another example of people who say we should end fossils overnight but don't know how that could actually be achieved.
Another example from chapter 6 on capitalism: "Cutting fossil fuel subsidies would single-handedly cut global CO2 emissions by 36%." Really? (Note that sources at the end of the book are grouped by chapter, but sources for ch.6 are omitted entirely, so we don't know what his source is here.) FF subsidies do not equate to CO2 emissions. Think about it: how does government giving financial assistance to the energy industry immediately translate into people driving their cars? It doesn't. If we ended all FF subsidies, the industry would have to fund their operations like other companies do, through their regular business operations, issuing of bonds, and other means. The FF industry famously spends billions on share buybacks. That money comes from their profits, and could be spent on funding operations if need be. So cutting subsidies won't simply result in CO2 emissions reductions. Instead, if governments cut these subsidies, do you think the oil industry would respond perhaps by raising oil prices? Of course they would. Who would that hurt? Everyone. Would people just stop driving or flying or cooking or heating their homes? Of course not. And the industry would have a logical reason for raising prices, even if it were disingenuous: we had to raise prices because without subsidies, we have less capital to fund operations; they could even claim "not enough" capital to fund operations so naturally, prices must go up. I would love to see their subsidies ended, but it would mean governments would need to get very tough with these companies to force them NOT to react by raising prices, which might only be accomplished by taking them over and turning these companies into state industries, which would make sense given that their freedom to chase profits caused global warming in the first place when they buried the evidence their scientists presented them on this growing problem decades ago.
He has a chapter called "A luxury cruise liner is a stinking floating dumpster." Obviously, he doesn't go on cruises. But he does like to fly. So it's "down with cruises" but "fly without guilt"?
He’s not a climate scientist but that’s not necessarily a problem. As someone working now in the climate science world, I can say that some of what he says is true and helpful (planting trees won’t help us, offsets are bogus) but he is clearly focused on his own biases rather than the science or even reasoned thinking. Everyone has biases, of course. But when you can spot them like this, a hundred miles away, it’s hard to take seriously.
What Assaad fails to consider is the fact that we simply CAN NOT stop using fossil fuels with anything like the speed with which he and other equally biased mainstream people within the climate science “community” would like. Obviously he hasn’t read Simon Michaux’s thorough and unique study on the feasibility of transitioning from fossils to renewables purely from a materials requirement/availability perspective, in which Michaux concludes that we simply do not have enough of the most important metals left (reserves) in order to build the thousands of new renewable electric power plants necessary. Even if we had a hundred years to do it, let alone a few decades. Renewables are at best going to be able to help us deal with our energy needs as fossils either deplete or are abandoned (unlikely) which means the world will have to get used to having a lot less energy to play with. But very few people or policymakers have bothered to think this through as they gleefully declare net zero ambitions, which makes Michaux’s hefty study so unique.
This is one of the easiest climate books to read, but also one of the most easily dismissed.
The logic Assaad uses here is easily turned on anything: “Why waste time trying to stop the oil industry? It won’t happen!”
Similar logical errors: "We don't have time to switch everyone to plant-based diets or to stop everyone flying." Really? We don't have the time for that? But we have the time to "just say no" to oil? Practical considerations make our ending of FF use a decades-long goal (we have to eat, heat our homes, cook, etc). Assaad is another example of people who say we should end fossils overnight but don't know how that could actually be achieved.
Another example from chapter 6 on capitalism: "Cutting fossil fuel subsidies would single-handedly cut global CO2 emissions by 36%." Really? (Note that sources at the end of the book are grouped by chapter, but sources for ch.6 are omitted entirely, so we don't know what his source is here.) FF subsidies do not equate to CO2 emissions. Think about it: how does government giving financial assistance to the energy industry immediately translate into people driving their cars? It doesn't. If we ended all FF subsidies, the industry would have to fund their operations like other companies do, through their regular business operations, issuing of bonds, and other means. The FF industry famously spends billions on share buybacks. That money comes from their profits, and could be spent on funding operations if need be. So cutting subsidies won't simply result in CO2 emissions reductions. Instead, if governments cut these subsidies, do you think the oil industry would respond perhaps by raising oil prices? Of course they would. Who would that hurt? Everyone. Would people just stop driving or flying or cooking or heating their homes? Of course not. And the industry would have a logical reason for raising prices, even if it were disingenuous: we had to raise prices because without subsidies, we have less capital to fund operations; they could even claim "not enough" capital to fund operations so naturally, prices must go up. I would love to see their subsidies ended, but it would mean governments would need to get very tough with these companies to force them NOT to react by raising prices, which might only be accomplished by taking them over and turning these companies into state industries, which would make sense given that their freedom to chase profits caused global warming in the first place when they buried the evidence their scientists presented them on this growing problem decades ago.
He has a chapter called "A luxury cruise liner is a stinking floating dumpster." Obviously, he doesn't go on cruises. But he does like to fly. So it's "down with cruises" but "fly without guilt"?
He’s not a climate scientist but that’s not necessarily a problem. As someone working now in the climate science world, I can say that some of what he says is true and helpful (planting trees won’t help us, offsets are bogus) but he is clearly focused on his own biases rather than the science or even reasoned thinking. Everyone has biases, of course. But when you can spot them like this, a hundred miles away, it’s hard to take seriously.
What Assaad fails to consider is the fact that we simply CAN NOT stop using fossil fuels with anything like the speed with which he and other equally biased mainstream people within the climate science “community” would like. Obviously he hasn’t read Simon Michaux’s thorough and unique study on the feasibility of transitioning from fossils to renewables purely from a materials requirement/availability perspective, in which Michaux concludes that we simply do not have enough of the most important metals left (reserves) in order to build the thousands of new renewable electric power plants necessary. Even if we had a hundred years to do it, let alone a few decades. Renewables are at best going to be able to help us deal with our energy needs as fossils either deplete or are abandoned (unlikely) which means the world will have to get used to having a lot less energy to play with. But very few people or policymakers have bothered to think this through as they gleefully declare net zero ambitions, which makes Michaux’s hefty study so unique.
This is one of the easiest climate books to read, but also one of the most easily dismissed.
November 11, 2023
While reading Saving the Planet Without the Bullshit, I found myself aligning with the perspectives of those who have given the book less favorable reviews. The book seems to be filled with opinions that, to me, lacked a logical foundation. For instance, the authors seem to justify air travel, which is responsible for around 2.4% of global CO2 emissions and is one of the fastest-growing sources of greenhouse gases.
Furthermore, the critique of veganism seemed to conflate the concept with the environmental impact of not consuming beef. It’s widely recognized that cattle farming significantly contributes to environmental pollution, including land and water degradation, biodiversity loss, acid rain, coral reef degeneration, and deforestation. On the contrary, a vegan diet is known to have a lower environmental impact, with agriculture, particularly animal agriculture, being responsible for at least 37 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions.
The content of the book felt heavily influenced by the personal preferences of the billionaire author, rather than being a balanced, objective analysis. In my view, the book may not provide the insightful or enlightening read that some might be seeking."
Furthermore, the critique of veganism seemed to conflate the concept with the environmental impact of not consuming beef. It’s widely recognized that cattle farming significantly contributes to environmental pollution, including land and water degradation, biodiversity loss, acid rain, coral reef degeneration, and deforestation. On the contrary, a vegan diet is known to have a lower environmental impact, with agriculture, particularly animal agriculture, being responsible for at least 37 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions.
The content of the book felt heavily influenced by the personal preferences of the billionaire author, rather than being a balanced, objective analysis. In my view, the book may not provide the insightful or enlightening read that some might be seeking."
November 27, 2023
If you want a catch-up on the state of global warming today and possible solutions, this is the perfect book. Razzouk not just presents what we need to be doing today to fight global warming but also debunks several myths. So when Trump says, “Windmills rust, they rot, they kill the birds,” you know why it’s baseless.
He advocates that individual action to reduce your carbon footprint is a distraction and we should remain focused on policy action and on tackling the “nasty 90” (90 companies that are responsible for 2/3rd of all bad greenhouse gas emissions) . A big game changer would be when we begin pricing in climate risks for all investments, and for governments to stop subsidizing oil and gas. Wind and solar energy is already cheaper to produce compared to non-green sources. If you price in climate risks, even more so!
The book is divided into bite-sized chapters (I love the chapter names) and is dense with figures. It can be repetitive at times but I think that’s deliberate to drive in the point that we need to accelerate the switch to renewable energy. He also doesn’t highlight enough the human right atrocities that will only get worse as the world switches to electric vehicles or that maybe we should be focused on improving public transport instead? I learnt a lot reading this book and it really should be assigned as a textbook for all students as it is essential reading.
Side note: I have also been following Razzouk on LinkedIn / Twitter to keep updated on global warming news. His podcast “the angry clean energy guy” is another great source for the latest news.
He advocates that individual action to reduce your carbon footprint is a distraction and we should remain focused on policy action and on tackling the “nasty 90” (90 companies that are responsible for 2/3rd of all bad greenhouse gas emissions) . A big game changer would be when we begin pricing in climate risks for all investments, and for governments to stop subsidizing oil and gas. Wind and solar energy is already cheaper to produce compared to non-green sources. If you price in climate risks, even more so!
The book is divided into bite-sized chapters (I love the chapter names) and is dense with figures. It can be repetitive at times but I think that’s deliberate to drive in the point that we need to accelerate the switch to renewable energy. He also doesn’t highlight enough the human right atrocities that will only get worse as the world switches to electric vehicles or that maybe we should be focused on improving public transport instead? I learnt a lot reading this book and it really should be assigned as a textbook for all students as it is essential reading.
Side note: I have also been following Razzouk on LinkedIn / Twitter to keep updated on global warming news. His podcast “the angry clean energy guy” is another great source for the latest news.
April 18, 2025
The book provides some good ideas about how to deal with climate change in terms of counter reactions. However, it is hard to keep track on citations as they are given chapter wise without providing the exact point of the source in the book. Moreover, in one chapter, the author tells one software company to help gas companies by selling them the software. Firstly, if that company does not sell their products, another company would sell them theirs. Secondly, there are open source and free software that the oil companies can always use in case of no sellers.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
July 25, 2023
The book succeeds in trying to consolidate complex issues into simple answers. I do suspect that some of its solutions are still up for debate. But an enjoyable read/ Terrifying. Personally it was good to read a book that offers constructive ways to combat climate change, without the usual parrot answers that have become the norm.
November 27, 2024
“It turns out that whoever named it 'natural gas' instead of 'highly explosive fossil fuel gas' deserved a world-topping branding award.”
fossil fuel industry has been deliberately shifting the weight of climate change into individuals instead of taking responsibility for its emissions … the time for change is now - highly recommend
fossil fuel industry has been deliberately shifting the weight of climate change into individuals instead of taking responsibility for its emissions … the time for change is now - highly recommend
January 13, 2025
Every chapter is relatively similar. Finance plus oil, gas and coal sectors bad. Plant-based (heavily processed) food and bicycles good. Very little insight and no creative thinking, just a bunch of google-able facts with a one-sided perspective.
October 11, 2023
Stays too much on the surface. Like a bunch of Wikipedia pages put together.
January 27, 2024
Eye opening
June 26, 2024
It was an interesting take the ubiquitous problem of climate change. A key takeaway was to resist oil, gas and coal companies who are trying to shift the burden onto individuals.
January 14, 2025
Sadly bullsh*t. Flying is fine but cruisehips arent? Dont bother with veganism? Bitcoin is fine coz mining for gold is worst.... This book is full of biased opinion
September 6, 2023
Assaad Razzouk’s self-serving Climate Bullshit book should have been titled “Save the planet without all the bullshit that I don’t like.”
This book is so predictable considering the source: a self-made millionaire in renewable energy who obviously flies a lot and eats meat comes out and says the number one thing we should do is stop subsidizing the oil industry (his rival in business) and invest in renewables (his industry) and by the way flying is okay because I fly a lot, and because “the industry lied to you” but going vegan isn’t necessary because I like meat and of course capitalism isn’t a problem because without it I wouldn’t be a millionaire and fighting it is a waste of time because stopping capitalism “won’t happen.”
The logic Assaad uses here is easily turned on anything: “Why waste time trying to stop the oil industry? It won’t happen!”
He’s not a climate scientist but that’s not necessarily a problem. Working now in the climate science world, I can say that some of what he says is true and helpful (planting trees won’t help us) but he is clearly presenting here a list of items peppered with his own biases rather than being based on the science or even reasoned thinking.
The book is pretty short with large print, easy to digest, but isn’t coming from an informed or unbiased source. Everyone has biases, of course. But when you can spot them like this, a hundred miles away, it’s hard to take seriously. This is another self-serving book by a businessman trying to get attention and help his business get ahead.
What Assaad fails to consider is the fact that we simply CAN NOT stop using fossil fuels with anything like the speed with which he and other equally biased mainstream people within the climate science “community” would like. Obviously he hasn’t read Simon Michaux’s thorough and unique study on the feasibility of transitioning from fossils to renewables purely from a materials requirement/availability perspective, in which Michaux concludes that we simply do not have enough of the most important metals left (reserves) in order to build the thousands of new renewable electric power plants necessary. Even if we had a hundred years to do it, let alone a few decades. Renewables are at best going to be able to help us deal with our energy needs as fossils either deplete or are abandoned (unlikely) which means the world will have to get used to having a lot less energy to play with.
But very few people or policymakers have bothered to think this through as they gleefully declare net zero ambitions, which makes Michaux’s hefty study so unique.
This is one of the easiest climate books to read, but also one of the most easily dismissed.
This book is so predictable considering the source: a self-made millionaire in renewable energy who obviously flies a lot and eats meat comes out and says the number one thing we should do is stop subsidizing the oil industry (his rival in business) and invest in renewables (his industry) and by the way flying is okay because I fly a lot, and because “the industry lied to you” but going vegan isn’t necessary because I like meat and of course capitalism isn’t a problem because without it I wouldn’t be a millionaire and fighting it is a waste of time because stopping capitalism “won’t happen.”
The logic Assaad uses here is easily turned on anything: “Why waste time trying to stop the oil industry? It won’t happen!”
He’s not a climate scientist but that’s not necessarily a problem. Working now in the climate science world, I can say that some of what he says is true and helpful (planting trees won’t help us) but he is clearly presenting here a list of items peppered with his own biases rather than being based on the science or even reasoned thinking.
The book is pretty short with large print, easy to digest, but isn’t coming from an informed or unbiased source. Everyone has biases, of course. But when you can spot them like this, a hundred miles away, it’s hard to take seriously. This is another self-serving book by a businessman trying to get attention and help his business get ahead.
What Assaad fails to consider is the fact that we simply CAN NOT stop using fossil fuels with anything like the speed with which he and other equally biased mainstream people within the climate science “community” would like. Obviously he hasn’t read Simon Michaux’s thorough and unique study on the feasibility of transitioning from fossils to renewables purely from a materials requirement/availability perspective, in which Michaux concludes that we simply do not have enough of the most important metals left (reserves) in order to build the thousands of new renewable electric power plants necessary. Even if we had a hundred years to do it, let alone a few decades. Renewables are at best going to be able to help us deal with our energy needs as fossils either deplete or are abandoned (unlikely) which means the world will have to get used to having a lot less energy to play with.
But very few people or policymakers have bothered to think this through as they gleefully declare net zero ambitions, which makes Michaux’s hefty study so unique.
This is one of the easiest climate books to read, but also one of the most easily dismissed.
April 7, 2023
I found this book to be quite an insightful and eye-opening read about the climate crisis. I learnt lots of new and surprising information. At times I felt the reading was very dense in research/statistics, making it tricky to read and understand.
I was hoping to read more about what I can do as an individual to reduce my carbon footprint but the main focus of the book was on the bigger compies and policies in the world. It did give a few tips for individuals though which I liked.
Recommended for anyone interested in the climate crisis/wanting to educate themselves.
I was hoping to read more about what I can do as an individual to reduce my carbon footprint but the main focus of the book was on the bigger compies and policies in the world. It did give a few tips for individuals though which I liked.
Recommended for anyone interested in the climate crisis/wanting to educate themselves.
August 8, 2023
Excellent and ultimately hopeful. Necessary reading.
Displaying 1 - 29 of 29 reviews