Customer Reviews

Apollo's Fire: Igniting America's Clean Energy Economy

5 star:		(3)
4 star:		(2)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(3)

 

 

Congressman Jay Inslee puts forth his view toward a solution to fuel prices and climate change. The field is rather crowded right now for books on this topic. Inslee approaches the angle of the economy and jobs more fully than his competitors. He remains more neutral on hydrogen, nuclear, and clean coal, while encouraging wind, solar, and tidal energy.

Inslee puts forth Ten Energy Enlightenments.

1. Opportunity Is Best Found in Crisis
2. Boldness Is Required - Tinkering at the Edges Didn't Put a Man on the Moon
3. We Must Reject the Tyranny of the Present
4. There Are No Silver Bullets
5. Everybody Needs to Get on the Bus
6. If Government Sets the Road Signs, the Market Will Drive
7. Failure Is an Option
8. Prejudices Are Best Left at the Door
9. Clean Energy Will Be Powered by New Politics
10. No More Free Lunches

"Failure Is an Option" is one that has been forgotten. As a nation it seems that fear of risk in the short-term is setting America up for absolute failure in the long-term. Like Apollo 13, failure is a necessary part of exploration.

Inslee sizes up energy situation and climate change well, and does thorough descriptions of energy alternatives - solar, wind, biofuels, clean coal, nuclear, tidal. His description of the "Four Horsemen of the Energy Apocalypse" is memorable.

1. Inertia - ideas can represent change in investments, policies and behavior. Inertia wears down efforts to change the status quo.

2. Special interests

3. Miasma of ideology - issues are viewed through an ideological prism rather than a scientific, pragmatic one.

4. Fear - we cannot adopt policies that can succeed.

I would add one more. Fashion. Once ideas sit for too long the media will migrate back to other things, such as Britney, Paris or Lindsay.

Congressman Inslee is a full-time elected representative with a background in economics and law, so we expect a book written by him to emphasize economics and public policy, and to be weak on science. Still, he could have sought out help on science.

His book merely supports popular solutions to the climate-change problem and disdains unpopular ones, and he never checks the data. For example, he proposes to replace gasoline with cellulosic ethanol made from switchgrass. He points to publications that promise salubrious results and doesn't mention that cellulosic ethanol has never been shown to be practical. He's sure that compressed air could store enough energy to make part-time energy sources like wind and solar practical, but he never took the trouble to see how much air volume would be required--if he did he'd realize that no such scheme could ever work. He quotes a promoter of algal biofuels saying 650 gallons of biofuel per acre per year would offset the US's oil imports with only 0.1% of its land area. A pocket calculator shows it would take over 13%, compared with 18% that's arable. In contrast, he agonizes over nuclear energy. He's aware of its importance in slowing global warming, but he's fallen into the trap of believing it enables weapons proliferation. He wrings his hands over spent fuel from reactors, even though no person has ever been harmed by it. He gasps at construction costs for nuclear plants but says nothing about the costs of wind and solar, even though those costs are higher.

We should be pleased that a representative would interest himself in this subject enough to write a book about it. The book would be more helpful if he'd taken greater care.

A much better book is Terrestrial Energy by William Tucker, a career journalist who studied the same subjects extensively and produced a comprehensive but quite legible study. Mr. Tucker lays it all out plainly with no patience for unexamined hypotheses and empty wishes. [...]

The thing I like about this book is that it was a great crossover book for both my boyfriend and I. I don't follow energy issues nearly as closely as he does. I need a book that isn't too dry and keeps my interest, but provides the information I need to come up to speed on solutions to global warming and energy independence. This book accomplishes that by relaying that information through personal stories of individuals throughout the country, and contrasting their efforts with national policy. At the same time, judging from my partner's perspective, he was very happy with the book providing him with the latest on this fast moving subject and offering insights into the best investment opportunities in the clean energy space. The book also had some interesting anecdotes about interactions with politicians like Bill Clinton.

The only thing that I think can be considered a down side for the book is that it could have given the status of its policy proposals in Congress. However, I do recognize that doing this could make the whole book outdated when new laws are finally passed.

I think I speak for my partner and I when I say that it was inspiring. Finally, a proposed solution (or plan at least) to this problem!

The writing is a bit on the florid side in places, however, Congressman Inslee and his team have put together a well balanced presentation of the global climate crisis along with a comprehensive plan for a solution. Like President Kennedy's call to put a man on the moon, Congressman Inslee is calling on all to be part of the solution to our dependence on foreign oil and to reduce our CO2 footprint. I believe he is correct in his statement that there is no silver bullet solution, but rather a million parts that must come together to create a solution, from conservation, to planning buildings as if energy matters, to investing in research for new energy sources. I appreciated Congressman Inslee's proposed "American Energy Policy". The economic concept of creating a class of green collar workers from current displaced workers is intriguing. This book is written so that you don't have to be a scientist or an environmental activist to understand, it is a good look at what we can and should be doing.

I love Jay Inslee and I think he is a great politician, BUT, solving the global warming climate crises ISN'T Rocket Science! It is within our grasp today. American waste twice as much energy as Europeans to achieve the same lifestyle and per-capita GDP. That's just stupid. Fixing much of this is trivial: I bought CFLs, turn off the lights when not in the room, saved 50% on my electrical bill, and applied 10% of that savings to sign up for my electrical utilities "100% green" option to make sure my electricity is coming only from solar and windmills. And I saved myself money. That ISN'T Rocket Science. Rather it is common sense -- something that has been conspicuously absent from American Politics for the last 30 years! And for God's Sake Buy A Prius!

Excellent, this is a very scholarly, comprehensive, objective, and informative compendium of just about all energy aspects. Worthwhile the time to really understand the challenge we all face!

This book was impossible to read without writing notes with a red pen in the margins. It's a compilation of oxymorons, contradictions, omissions of fact, and glowing praise of business which have since failed. Inslee describes a meeting with VP Dick Cheney, who responds to Inslee's promo for clean energy by telling Inslee, "You just don't understand economics." After reading the book, I must absolute agree with Cheney's analysis. However, this shouldn't be surprising to readers given that co-author Hendricks belongs to Socialist organizations Center for American Progress and Apollo Alliance.
Here are some examples from the book:
*The authors state that a typical Japanese citizens uses less than a third of the electricity that an American citizen does. What they fail to disclose is that the average size of a Japanese home is half that of the US, and use fewer and smaller appliances than Americans.
*Promotes ethanol without disclosing that California uses 2000 gallons of water to produce 1 gallon of ethanol or that ethanol is so corrosive that it can't be piped and must be trucked (parasitic fuel usage).
*The authors glowingly report of clean energy progress made by companies now bankrupt:SkyPower, EarthFirst, VeraSun Energy, Aventine Renewables, Pacific Ethanol yet decries Enron as having swindled investors. And goes on to describe all the job growth created by other companies who have now laid off substantial numbers of employees.
In summary, the book is an egregious example of Socialist propaganda, devoid of intellectual honesty, and a mental substitute for epicac.

On page 188, Rep. Inslee states: "A wind turbine's output rises exponentially with the length of its blades." Actually, the relationship is not exponential; it is polynomial. If the relationship were exponential, it would be possible to connect several sequential wind turbines to create a perpetual motion machine.

Rep. Inslee's home state of Washington has a math requirement for graduating high school students. This standard clearly states that high school graduates should understand the difference between exponential and polynomial relationships. Perhaps Rep. Inslee should repeat high school math before he expounds on "solutions" for the nations energy crisis.

Clean, fairly priced, non monopolized energy sources and distribution are so important for the present and future. Lots of great ideas but why name the book after a pagan deity that with a simple wikipedia search reveals more than I wanted to know about Apollo as a demonic entity and his works. If you really wanted to get the message out, pull the title and rename it with out religious conitations (unless intentional). Please stop shooting yourself, and every one else who believes strongly in this issue, in the foot and lets get on with the task at hand.