Rating: 
Summary: Rifkin's got the right basic idea
Review: Jeremy Rifkin's latest effort at popularization tackles the energy problem, which never went away, but is back on everyone's mind after 9/11. He has the right idea, which is a shift to renewable energy, using solar and other sources to create clean hydrogen fuel as a replacement for oil. He goes further, proposing that the creation of a decentralized "energy web" based on local inputs from fuel-cells and PVCs will make giant energy companies obsolete. As others have noted, all this is only sketched in the last two chapters -- the first seven chapters focus on the problem of non-renewable fossil fuels. This first part of the book is fine -- incredibly important -- but it means that the title is quite misleading. And the fact that oil is running out is dealt with much more thoroughly in Richard Heinberg's THE PARTY'S OVER (see my review).
The Bush Administration recently announced funding for hydrogen auto research. This is good, but only symbolic, while the priority is still on oil and nuclear power. What is needed is more than symbolism -- we've got to shift gears to make renewable energy the absolute top priority. We have only a short window to use the remaining fossil fuels to build the renewable energy infrastructure. We're going to make an energy transition of one sort or another, but the one we're headed for is not the one we would choose if we were paying attention (ie, post-oil collapse).
See my OVERSHOOT AND COLLAPSE? list for more on oil and energy.
Rating:
Summary: Rifkin's got the right basic idea
Review: Jeremy Rifkin's latest effort at popularization tackles the energy problem, which never went away, but is back on everyone's mind after 9/11. He has the right idea, which is a shift to renewable energy, using solar and other sources to create clean hydrogen fuel as a replacement for oil. He goes further, proposing that the creation of a decentralized "energy web" based on local inputs from fuel-cells and PVCs will make giant energy companies obsolete. As others have noted, all this is only sketched in the last two chapters -- the first seven chapters focus on the problem of non-renewable fossil fuels. This first part of the book is fine -- incredibly important -- but it means that the title is quite misleading. And the fact that oil is running out is dealt with much more thoroughly in Richard Heinberg's "The Party's Over" (see my review). The Bush Administration recently announced funding for hydrogen auto research. This is good, but only symbolic, while the priority is still on oil and nuclear power. What is needed is more than symbolism -- we've got to shift gears to make renewable energy the absolute top priority. We have only a short window to use the remaining fossil fuels to build the renewable energy infrastructure. We're going to make an energy transition of one sort or another, but the one we're headed for is not the one we would choose if we were paying attention (ie, post-oil collapse).
Rating: 
Summary: Missing the key element -- production
Review: This book did a great job of spelling out the problems with oil and the history of the oil industry and the USA's success linked to oil. This was very informative and interesting. Then Rifkin quickly mentions renewable energy will become available to make hydrogen. It's almost unnoticeable how quickly he skips this step, however this is the critical step. Without cheap electricity from a renewable source we might as well use fossil fuels. He never mentions and I don't think he understands how a substitute for fuel cells could do the same thing.
I can't believe how many copies this book sold and how the public blindly believes everything in this book. Now I have to spend my time correcting people and arguing with uninformed newspaper editors as to where our public funds and attention should be directed. They should be focused on the production of cheap electricity through renewable resources. The EU leaders understand this, it's obvious or president doesn't, and it's pretty obvious that the general public in the US doesn't understand it either.
Rating:
Summary: Too little discussion about hydrogen production
Review: This book does a great job of defining the energy dilemma especially the upcoming "Peak Oil" issues. It also does a great job of providing a historical context of our energy usage patterns, showing how energy use is intimately tied to material progress. The uses of hydrogen as a fuel and its effectiveness is defined well. So what is wrong? Well, most people who have even taken high school chemistry have a passing acquaintance wiht hydrogen, its cleanliness and its simplicity. So, this is not a great strength in my opinion. The real problem is Rifkin does not define how hydrogen can be produced or distributed efficiently, and without that, there is no real hydrogen vision at all. He uses a scant 8 pages to define alternatives for generation of hydrogen for instance. Yet, this is the essential mystery, and he does not resolve it! If hydrogen just becomes an energy transfer medium, like electricity, then it does nothing to resolve the scarcity or environmental problems of fossil fuels. I also found Rifkin's uses of some units of measurement showed him to be an amateur. Several times he mixed up units of work with power, a common enough error, but a dead giveaway against someone who purports to be an energy expert.
Rating:
Summary: Could the editor have messed it up?
Review: This book does a great job of defining the energy dilemma especially the upcoming "Peak Oil" issues. It also does a great job of providing a historical context of our energy usage patterns, showing how energy use is intimately tied to material progress. The uses of hydrogen as a fuel and its effectiveness is defined well. So what is wrong? Well, most people who have even taken high school chemistry have a passing acquaintance wiht hydrogen, its cleanliness and its simplicity. So, this is not a great strength in my opinion. The real problem is Rifkin does not define how hydrogen can be produced or distributed efficiently, and without that, there is no real hydrogen vision at all. He uses a scant 8 pages to define alternatives for generation of hydrogen for instance. Yet, this is the essential mystery, and he does not resolve it! If hydrogen just becomes an energy transfer medium, like electricity, then it does nothing to resolve the scarcity or environmental problems of fossil fuels. I also found Rifkin's uses of some units of measurement showed him to be an amateur. Several times he mixed up units of work with power, a common enough error, but a dead giveaway against someone who purports to be an energy expert.
Rating:
Summary: Too little discussion about hydrogen production
Review: This book does a great job of defining the energy dilemma especially the upcoming "Peak Oil" issues. It also does a great job of providing a historical context of our energy usage patterns, showing how energy use is intimately tied to material progress. The uses of hydrogen as a fuel and its effectiveness is defined well. So what is wrong? Well, most people who have even taken high school chemistry have a passing acquaintance wiht hydrogen, its cleanliness and its simplicity. So, this is not a great strength in my opinion. The real problem is Rifkin does not define how hydrogen can be produced or distributed efficiently, and without that, there is no real hydrogen vision at all. He uses a scant 8 pages to define alternatives for generation of hydrogen for instance. Yet, this is the essential mystery, and he does not resolve it! If hydrogen just becomes an energy transfer medium, like electricity, then it does nothing to resolve the scarcity or environmental problems of fossil fuels. I also found Rifkin's uses of some units of measurement showed him to be an amateur. Several times he mixed up units of work with power, a common enough error, but a dead giveaway against someone who purports to be an energy expert.
| 
