BOOK REVIEW: ‘Bright Green Lies: How Environmental Action is Lost and What We Can Do About It’ | By Derrick Jensen, Lierre Keith and Max Wilbert | 2021 | Paperback, $25 | Not fiction, environmentalism | Available at the Seattle Public Library
Environmentalism encompasses a wide spectrum of beliefs. In “Bright Green Lies: How the Environmental Movement Lost Its Way and What We Can Do About It,” authors Derrick Jensen, Lierre Keith and Max Wilbert fall into the “deep green” environmentalist camp. They believe that, “to save the planet, people must live within the limits of the natural world,” which will include “changes in our societies, cultures and lifestyles.” On the other hand, “bright green” environmentalists believe that technology can solve the crises we face while allowing our “high-energy lifestyle to continue indefinitely.”
The authors’ claim that this bright green theory is clearly false is backed up by a lot of data. To show that, they criticized the leading environmentalists and organizations for lying to the public. Green technologies, the authors say, are more aimed at saving our “industrial civilization” than saving life on Earth.
The “Bright Green Lies” basically attack “green energy” sources, including solar, wind, hydro, tidal, biofuels and others. The authors analyze the entire systemic requirements for each energy source, from raw materials to production, transportation, installation, operation, maintenance and disposal. Their point is that if you add up everything needed to implement green energy sources at the level needed to replace fossil fuels, including its external factors, the resulting damage to the Earth will not be much less. than to retain petroleum. The authors also repeatedly emphasize that green energy generally only provides more energy for our industrial civilization, not a reduction in the use of fossil fuels. The all-time high for fossil fuel use is in 2019, which means that efforts to transition to greener energy have had little impact, for now.
In its nearly 500 pages, “Bright Green Lies” provides many, many examples. Regarding solar energy, the book details the extensive mining required for the component materials and how the production of silicon releases a lot of carbon, pollutants and waste. The authors show how the solar panel manufacturing process works on Earth.
This same systematic analysis is applied to wind turbines. Their point, again, is that making green energy is a dirty, resource-intensive process. Along with wind power, they also mention the large number of bird and bat deaths caused by wind turbines. Building wind turbines to the level needed to replace fossil fuels results in over 100 million bird deaths and 250 million bat deaths each year. That’s on top of ongoing bird and bat populations collapsing due to environmental degradation.
The authors write that “the entire bright green scheme depends on energy storage” and try to prove that the required level of storage is impossible. In fact, according to “Bright Green Lies,” trying to do so is downright dangerous. “The grid itself is destroying the planet.”
The authors challenge the idea of ”energy efficiency,” arguing that it does not result in a meaningful reduction in energy use. They provide a wealth of data to show that the claimed benefits from recycling are largely a myth and that the real purpose of recycling is to help industry. They attack biofuels, biomass (burning waste for energy), geothermal energy and harvesting energy from currents. They provide particularly damning data on the damage caused by mining, shipping and hydropower. And they dedicate a chapter to show how sustainable cities are a false solution with negative benefits. They also dismiss geoengineering (the injection of aerosols into the upper atmosphere to reflect solar radiation) as a disaster waiting to happen.
Where does that leave us? The authors say the collapse is here. They claim that the fundamental issue is that humans don’t really care (that) about non-humans. It’s all about saving “us” and maintaining our current way of life. The authors claim that they want conveniencein our lifestyle. They write that the difference is that they are willing to recognize the cost: life on Earth. We are facing human-caused extinction of the planet. In the last 50 years, “humans have killed 60 percent of the animals on earth.” The key questions are whether we care and whether nonhuman life matters to us.
The authors write that we buy the false story told by bright green environmentalists because we want it to be true, but, unfortunately, capitalism and industrial civilization are unsustainable. We can’t have everything, so we have a choice: save the Earth or try to maintain our lifestyle.
The authors provide a “true environmental test.” For an action to be green, it “must benefit the natural world on the natural world’s own terms.” The question is not whether action makes things easier for us, but whether action is better for the environment.
The authors highlight some questions that should apply to all bright green technology proposals: Where do the materials come from? What effect does it have on Earth? What happens if it gets damaged?
Unfortunately, the bright green solutions did not pass the test.
To save our planet, the authors write that we must “stop destroying the planet and allow natural life to return. … Make no mistake, this will require a serious and dedicated resistance movement.” We must stop industrial civilization and heal the earth, including the restoration of forests, swamps, marshes, grasslands and soils.
They provide 14 meaningful goals for a truly green community, including stopping net carbon emissions within five years, protecting aquifers, removing dams, immediately eliminating monocrop agriculture, protecting endangered species, ending government funding of large infrastructure projects, rejecting the idea of endless growth and addressing overpopulation and overconsumption. They proposed reducing the US military budget by 80 percent to provide a peace dividend to pay for it all. At the individual level, they suggest readers choose a place and start work, one hectare at a time.
“Find something you love and defend it” is the best way to start organizing political resistance.
Obviously, “Bright Green Lies” is a terrible report, and the proposed solutions of the authors appear to be unattainable. The Republican party seems hell-bent on killing any meaningful environmental regulations and democracy, too, if that’s what it takes for them to win and stay in power. How bad are things for an anti-populist movement to rise up and fight for the real saving of the planet? It’s hard to imagine, but if the authors are right, rocky times are coming. I need a mature drink.
Dave Gamrath is a longtime community activist who founded InspireSeattle.org and serves on several regional boards and committees.
Read more on Sept. 7-13, 2022 issue.
