Peak Oil is You
Donate Bitcoins ;-) or Paypal :-)
Page added on September 11, 2014
On Becoming an Ecomodernist
The last few years have seen the emergence of a new environmental movement — sometimes called ecomodernism, other times eco-pragmatism — that offers a positive vision of our environmental future, rejects Romantic ideas about nature as unscientific and reactionary, and embraces advanced technologies, including taboo ones, like nuclear power and genetically modified organisms, as necessary to reducing humankind’s ecological footprint.
The most famous ecomodernists are Whole Earth Catalogue creator Stewart Brand, The Rockefeller University’s Jesse H. Ausubel, The Nature Conservancy Chief Scientist Peter Kareiva, former Nature writer Emma Marris, and pro-GMO UK green Mark Lynas, all of whom have written foundational books or essays in recent years.
One of the least well-known is Martin Lewis, a Stanford University geographer. In 1992, Duke University Press published Lewis’s fully realized philosophical, technological, economic, and political case for what we are today calling ecomodernism. His book had a polemical title, Green Delusions: An Environmentalist Critique of Radical Environmentalism, that put some reviewers off. But those who actually read it (we only discovered it a few years ago) are rewarded with a rigorously logical argument backed by strong evidence that urbanization, agricultural intensification, and a proactive role by the government in making clean energy cheap are the keys to protecting the environment.
Lewis’s work continues to be both empirical and visionary. Last year, Lewis created a series of fascinating color-coded maps (“Population Bomb? So Wrong”) showing how electricity access and even television viewing are correlated with lower birth rates in India. Last month, in response to a critique by Michael Lind of the idea that decoupling will result in more wilderness, Lewis created maps of how the San Francisco Bay Area could be “re-wilded” with grizzlies, mountain lions, and other wild animals.
As such, we are proud to publish Lewis’s coming-of-age story, “The Education of an Ecomodernist,” in Breakthrough Journal about how he lost his Arcadian religion while living among three indigenous groups in a small village in the highlands of Philippines. Like all good memoirs, it contains elements that feel at once familiar and particular, poignant and inspiring.
Without giving anything away, suffice it to say that Lewis discovered that the Indians did not behave as his romantic UC Berkeley professors had taught him they would, or should. Happily for us, neither did Martin.
12 Comments on "On Becoming an Ecomodernist"
Plantagenet on Thu, 11th Sep 2014 4:59 pm
WOW! After all this time it turns out I’m an ecomodernist — I had no idea it was a hip and groovy philosophy. I’ve followed Stewart Brand for years, but its cool to learn about the scholarly thought backing the ecomodernist point of view. This is GREAT! THANKS!
Norm on Thu, 11th Sep 2014 7:53 pm
Fake environmentalism. Like painting a garbage truck green, then calling it an organic garbage truck.
Makati1 on Thu, 11th Sep 2014 8:08 pm
Norm, you got it right. Some here should read the new Archdruid’s piece, “Technological Superstitions”.
Davy on Thu, 11th Sep 2014 8:11 pm
Take romance out of environmentalism that’s scary. It is precisely the mechanization and the hard linear non-sensitive aspect of man that is homogenizing and degrading nature. We are working hard on a jellyfish dominated ocean and super weeds, noxious pests, and invasive species on land. It’s a wonderful world with man at the helm.
HARM on Fri, 12th Sep 2014 4:40 am
“Last year, Lewis created a series of fascinating color-coded maps (“Population Bomb? So Wrong”)…Lewis created maps of how the San Francisco Bay Area could be “re-wilded” with grizzlies, mountain lions, and other wild animals.”
No matter how you feel about nuclear power or GMOs, these two statements alone should tell you how idiotic and delusional this guy is.
Norm on Fri, 12th Sep 2014 4:47 am
Hi Makita, hey kool, i got it right. Even a broken clock is correct, twice a day. :o)
Norm on Fri, 12th Sep 2014 4:50 am
Adding grizzlies and mountain lions to San Francisco Bay?? They will eat all the bums at the street corner, also devour the people on welfare & food stamps, plus a few government workers who stayed late at the office.
Sounds good, I am for this plan.
Davy on Fri, 12th Sep 2014 5:54 am
Norm, we are going to need those higher order predators when people start dying so fast there will be no place to bury them. The grizzlies and mountain lions will help. They eat dead flesh as long as it is not too decomposed. A few days makes for tender tasty meals for these animals.
rollin on Fri, 12th Sep 2014 6:48 am
Eco-modernist = the environmental version of the iPhone.
MSN fanboy on Fri, 12th Sep 2014 7:19 am
LOL, so turning the earth into a desert is a positive force for change.
adamx on Fri, 12th Sep 2014 4:50 pm
I have some mixed feelings about this.
I can see why it seems like a good idea to be less “romantic” as an environmentalist, but from experience, being “realistic” doesn’t help people hear what you’re saying any better. For example, saying “I don’t care if Idaho shoots a few wolves that kill too many cattle” doesn’t make people who hate wolves suddenly be more agreeable about them. Saying, “I don’t hate fishing, I do it myself” does not help when you’re arguing for limits on fishing. It’s simply pointless. The other side literally can’t hear what you’re saying. Nevertheless, there is no excuse for believing things that fly in the face of reality, like thinking that idigenous cultures can’t be destructive, etc.
As for “ecomodernism”, what does it mean? Does it include the false-flag “environmentalism” of Bjorn Lomborg? Embracing nuclear energy and GMOs creates it’s own problems – I mean, if you want to be really cynical, nuclear energy is a very, very good idea because every time there is a disaster, more of the environment becomes an accidental park. I think we can look forward to a few more of those parklands before society gets the hint. GMOs have lead to such an overuse of herbicides that monarch butterflies are now in danger of extinction due to lack of “weeds” that they need to survive.
With GMOs, there is also “what context?” I think very few environmentalists have a problem with the modification of papaya so that they are resistant to a virus, but most environmentalist consider roundup-ready crops a disaster on many fronts. “Ecomodernism” in that sense can be seen as a smear on environmentalism as a whole, painting most environmentalism as radical when it is not.
In any case, it’s kind of a moot point. The fossil fuel economy will continue until it literally cannot. Human nature guarantees this. An “ecomodernist” approach may have a positive impact in some areas, a “radical” approach may work in others, but the overall arc is one of increasing development and destruction. The end game will come due to physical limits. The best environmentalists can hope for is small victories. I hate to say it, but it’s true.
HARM on Sat, 13th Sep 2014 12:13 am
I mean, if you want to be really cynical, nuclear energy is a very, very good idea because every time there is a disaster, more of the environment becomes an accidental park. I think we can look forward to a few more of those parklands before society gets the hint.
LOL! Adamx wins for best “silver lining” of the week!