Not the End of the World: The Sunday Times bestseller that will make you rethink everything you thought you knew about climate change

Great book. Still lots to do but nice to read something positive about how far we have come. Very helpful in separating the essential to do from the less important

Hannah Ritchie’s Not the End of the World (NTEOTW) is a marvellous, understated, study of the environmental ills that afflict our planet – and the opportunities that are open for their resolution or amelioration. Ms Ritchie’s presentation is driven by data – she is a self-admitted ‘numbers nerd’. It is level-headed to a fault, the opposite of hype, sensationalism and cheap headlines. It is, in short, excellent and I recommend it with four and a half stars. NTEOTW dives in detail into seven main areas of environmental concern, looking dispassionately at the numbers and data that define their current status. Hannah Ritchie debunks popular myths – for example, plastic straws are actually fairly harmless; fish in the oceans are not going to be wiped out by 2050; shipping food a long distance to its market is not environmentally bad. The seven areas of concern are air pollution, climate change, deforestation, food and its production, biodiversity loss, ocean plastics, and overfishing. As near as I can summarise, Hannah Ritchie’s thesis is twofold. First, sustainability has two halves: meet the needs of the current generation, while avoiding depletion of natural resources that would hurt later generations (leave the environment in a better state than we found it). Second, every one of the seven areas may be in some degree of trouble, but every one is already either ‘on the turn’ or definitely getting better. We are course-correcting as we go. Linear extrapolation of bad trends to predict ultimate catastrophe is always wrong. Resolution of the problems in all seven areas is ‘known science’ (we know how to do it) and is within reach. Ms Ritchie’s message is a hopeful one, written with fine literacy by a scientist who knows how to write. The main niggle I have is this: Hannah Ritchie, in all seven areas, proposes a raft of eminently sensible practical measures we should take to accelerate improvement that is already under way. But who or what is going to drive and coordinate all the ‘we should’ actions? The European Union is a part answer but it only covers 20-25% of the world. What’s really needed is a responsible World Government and we’re a long way from that. This bit of scepticism aside, I think Ms Ritchie’s analysis and prescriptions are near enough faultless. The real ‘No-Nos’? •Burning stuff. We have to stop. •Beef and lamb are uniquely destructive on multiple levels: land use, deforestation, pollution, water use, efficiency of calorie conversion. We have to at least sharply reduce their consumption. •Deforestation. We have to stop – but reducing beef and sheep farming are the means of doing so. •Feed cereals to humans, not animals. Surprising facts? •We have passed “peak child”. Population will fall and is not in itself a problem. •Our air is cleaner than it has been for centuries, in the West. Elsewhere, its quality is improving fast. •We will probably pass 2 degrees C of global heating, but not by much. Predictions of 4 degrees are now out of date and invalid. •The world produces twice the amount of food we need. •Plastic packaging is a boon. Without it more food would be wasted, there would be more disease, more land and more deforestation would be needed to replace the food wasted. •Very little (1% of total production) plastic goes into the ocean, and almost none of this is from rich countries. Therefore, eliminating single-use plastics in rich countries will have almost no good effect. •Recycling is of limited use: plastic, for example, can only be recycled for 2 or 3 generations and then must be disposed of anyway. Recycling cannot be perpetual unless the plastic is broken all the way down to molecular level. •Good landfills are good. •Overall fish stocks are not in danger. Cod, tuna and other species are now being managed sustainably. Hannah Ritchie supports all of this with data and graphs that seem to me to be of unimpeachable validity. As I noted, she also presents in every area a raft of remedial actions that seem excellent, but which I won’t try to list here. She is highly critical of the cheap, sensationalist headline. To quote Shakespeare, ‘The Devil may cite scripture for his purpose’. Ms Ritchie summarises the problem on page 280 of the hardcover of NTEOTW: the EU reduced overfishing between 2007 and 2020 from 78% to 30%. “This situation is a perfect reflection of the three-true-statements: things are awful (30% are still overfished, and the EU missed its target); things are much better (30% is much less than the 78% it used to be); things can be improved.” See where the sensationalist headline comes from? I do have a few quibbles: •Chernobyl was responsible for 400 deaths in total (p62). I think it’s more than that. •Wood-burning is bad (p65 and elsewhere). Isn’t it carbon-neutral and therefore much less bad than burning coal? •Upgrading to LED light-bulbs is not of much benefit (p114). But it does reduce electricity consumption by a factor of ten as compared to incandescent bulbs and everyone is doing it (in the EU at least). Such a gain on an individual level may only be a little but multiplied by billions is a lot. •An error on p116: The Great Oxidation Event was 2.5 billion (not million) years ago. Overall, though, NTEOTW is a smashing book, the numeracy and erudition of which counter today’s largely sensationalist and emotional narrative. Recommended.

Read a book by an expert and you're likely to be influenced by the author's deep level of knowledge in the subject matter. The trouble is, the next book, written by a different expert, too often contradicts what you've already learned. The better ones quote real statistics to 'prove' their contentions and the best experts are usually those who have spent a lifetime immersed in their obsession. They 'know' what they are talking about and we can trust what they tell us. Give us Carl Sagan, David Attenborough, Professors Stephen Hawking, Brian Cox & Alice Roberts, Soichiro Honda and Albert Einstein. Now add to that list Hannah Ritchie. Quite how she has acquired so much knowledge so young is astounding. What's more impressive is her wisdom, her relentless search for scientific truth through her thorough examination of the wider context, alternative possibilities, historical and geographical factors and best of all, masses and masses of raw data. What use is a scientific theory that falls apart under the weight of research? Fashionable ideas based on limited data sets rapidly undone by (apparently) contradictory data have put us in the position in which we find ourselves. Is the planet warming or are we drifting into the next ice age? Is it cow farts or volcanoes or cars which are the problem? Is the Amazon rainforest losing an area the size of a small country every day and will the last polar bear floating towards the tropics on the last melting iceberg, have nothing to eat because we've killed all the fish? Hannah will tell you the truth in this impressive book. You'll see the research, the graphs and the comparative charts of all the good and the good and the harm we have been and are doing. She offers practical solutions and advice about how we can all do better. She is also a beacon of hope, not an over-dramatic merchant of doom. In fact you'll find this young lady unravelling the twaddle pedalled by some of those pseudo-science-fakes. Clearly, she was born to do what she's doing. It's like her brain was designed for analysis and rational thinking. It's like she's devoted every hour of every day of what must surely be her 300 years of life to bring us the answers we all need. The only problem is it's quite a big book and some people won't make the effort. You should though and you'll be glad you did. Meanwhile, David Attenborough and the BBC need to get to work on making this a four-part mini-series syndicated globally to make it accessible to everyone.

This book gives a grounded, facts based, view of the environmental problems that we face. It is a counterbalance to the doom and despair that is often used too easily to attract attention, but it still offers sensible and thoughtful approaches to what are unquestionably real issues.

The data are presented in an accessible way and the reader is allowed to form their own conclusions, i.e., the author does not tell us what we should think or do. I have a PhD in a biological/ecological subject and the data certainly challenged my beliefs, so I'm sure they will challenge your's too. I now regard this book as a "must read" for everyone.

When I saw the Guardian article about this upcoming book I was excited and preordered both the audio and kindle book. To say the topic is important is vastly understating it! Trying to get those who care to move from a position of paralysis generated by fear, or those who have a false sense of comfort through ineffectual activities to meaningful and hopeful action. And the starting point is data. What I liked: 1. The author highlights the false binaries we like to build (local versus global food, plastic versus ...well anything, GM versus 'natural' etc) 2. She does a very good job of highlighting where our focus should be and where our environmental efforts will drive better outcomes. (based on data and not emotion) 3. She delves into the topics to demystify and 'de-scare' us as readers from a few widely used and incorrect dogmas (I used the there'll-be-more-plastic-in-the-sea-by-2050 one a few times, until a couple of years ago) This makes some of these problems become manageable. For example, creating a waste infrastructure in South East Asia to deal with waste plastic. What I would have loved to see, based on the the way the book is positioned. 1. Less dogmatic conclusions. The conclusions are sometimes quite forthright. In the context of data science, getting the right data is just a starting point. One can still come to the wrong conclusion and there is space for discussion, particularly when putting the 'fact' into the complex messiness of human and environmental systems. The GM discussion is one such example (there are others) . If it was just based on improved yields and increased disease resistance then the argument is closed. However there are genuine debates to be had about how IP ownership and business models (amongst other issues) impact whether, where and how they should be implemented. These have caused nightmare real-world impacts. Of course it's right that the debate should not stop at the description of them as 'frankenfoods', but the debate also shouldn't stop at the science. Quite a bit of the presentation (my simplistic caricature) is, 'I used to do x because it felt right for me and other environmentalists and then when I saw the real data I changed to y ...and that's what we should all be doing'. 2. My biggest hope for the book was some engagement on the fears increasing numbers of people have about the various tipping points and interacting environmental systems breakdowns will have. More and more people are hearing about these things and are concerned. You don't need to be an expert in complex systems and non-linear dynamics to be aware that this is all connected. So if we hit 2 degrees (which looks pretty baked in now), will systems breakdown accelerate this away out of our control. I hope I'm wrong, but ...

This is an important book, talks sense, doesn’t preach, and uses accessible figures and science. If you want to know, rather than just take on board ill informed sound bites, read it.

This is a superb book for anyone who wants to see a more sustainable future for our world. It’s an upbeat and optimistic call to take the next step and deliver a sustainable future. Ritchie was obviously influenced by Hans Rosling’s work, and rightly so. Rosling’s analysis of humanity’s progress was compelling and Ritchie’s analysis of the planet is no less ambitious or inspiring. During the time I was reading the book new figures emerged that showed China’s population falling in half by the end of the century. Figures such as those bring huge challenges for China and other countries but they’re great news for the planet. The population will fall, but we’ve still got lots to do to see off climate change. This is an inspiring read and shows that there is hope that we can at last create a sustainable world and a recovering natural world. We’re (mostly) on the right path, we just need to do more of the right things to deliver a brighter future. It’s a modern classic and will hopefully be seen as such. The future is way better than we feared, and full of potential. Thank you Hannah Ritchie.

Cuando al inicio del libro la autora dice que la inspiró 'Factfulness' de Hans Rosling supe que me iba a gustar. Sin esconder los retos ambientales los que nos enfrentamos como sociedad, el libro está lleno de estadísticas, cifras y gráficos - todo ello explicado de forma muy amena y cercana- que desmienten algunos mitos o ideas muy extendidas, nos muestra que en muchos casos estamos mejor de lo que pensamos y, sobretodo, que ser la primera generación en alcanzar un desarrollo sostenible realmente está a nuestro alcance. Lo recomiendo totalmente.

Well written, to the point and pleasant reading. Important messages and lessons on how to be more sustainable. The book also deals with false perceptions on how to be eco-friendly. Enjoy!

I think this is an immensely important book and one that everyone should read, especially government leaders that are enacting laws and policies that impact the planet and climate change. Major media outlets should also read it and report on issues like the author does, focusing on how we can still build a sustainable planet rather than spewing all the fear mongering nonsense that they do to get clicks. Based on the title alone (without reading the sub title), you'd probably think that the author is a climate change denier, writing to make you believe it's all a hoax. However, she's quite the opposite. She knows what's happening to the environment, but rather than fear mongering she sights specific examples of how humans as a species have acted (and quickly) in the past to positively impact the planet and reverse bad practices that were negatively impacting the environment. She paints a picture that makes the reader believe we can still save this giant blue ball floating around the universe before it's too late; whether or not we take action to do that remains to be seen.

Worth to buy !!! A lot of myths debunked and clarified. Enriching book. Satisfied

Het boek voldoeg helemaal - de levertermijn van 5 maand : not quite. Amai Amazon. 🤌