"Nothing succeeds like the appearance of success." - Christopher Lasch

***

Jolly green heretic

"He has come up with a series of what he calls “environmental heresies”, which he hopes will influence a new generation of pragmatic, problem-solving greens. Three things that most greens vehemently oppose—genetic engineering, urbanisation and nuclear power—should, he believes, be embraced on environmental grounds.

Start with genetic engineering. Many greens object to the idea, fearing a deluge of “Frankenfoods” and the contamination of pristine wild species. But Mr Brand points to the work of Norman Borlaug, the Nobel prize-winner who proved the Club of Rome (and Mr Brand) wrong with his “green revolution” in agricultural productivity. Mr Brand now sees great promise in using genetic science to feed the world, and perhaps prevent future wars, by making crops that are more disease-resistant, drought-tolerant and produce higher yields.

Similarly, he argues that urbanisation can be good for the environment. Mankind has now become a primarily urban species for the first time in its history, and every serious forecast predicts a surge in the size and number of megacities. Most environmentalists are dismayed at this trend, and worry about the implications of urbanisation for air pollution, resource consumption and so on. But Mr Brand bluntly rebuts them, insisting that megacities “will increase the Earth's carrying capacity for humans”.

... Cities are good for the planet, he argues, because they are engines of wealth creation, and greater prosperity makes promoting greenery easier. When poor people move from bleak subsistence farming to the economic opportunities found in urban slums, he insists, they no longer need to chop down endangered trees or eat bush meat. “Nature grows back,” says Mr Brand. He also believes cities unleash innovation—pointing to the use of mobile phones in slums to send money—and reckons the next big trend will come “not from Japanese schoolgirls, but slum-dwellers in Africa”.

Mr Brand's critics accuse him of romanticising the potential of megacities. But his support for the revival of nuclear power is even more controversial. For years, he held the orthodox environmental view that nukes were evil. He now confesses that this was merely “knee-jerk opposition”, and not a carefully considered opinion. His growing concern about global warming, which he calls “the single most important environmental threat facing mankind”, explains his U-turn in favour of this low-carbon but hugely controversial source of electricity...

Nuclear waste still contains an enormous amount of energy, future generations may be able to harness it as an energy source through tomorrow's better technologies...

“Saying all companies are evil is like saying all greens are romantic twits,” he says. “You need to discriminate!” To bolster his point, he points to what he calls the quiet but influential role that Royal Dutch/Shell played in South Africa's peaceful end to apartheid. He also defends his military clients with vigour, noting that they are often “more serious” and “longer-term thinkers” than business clients...

“Coal and carbon-loading the atmosphere are much bigger problems for the future than nuclear waste, which is a relatively minor risk,” he says.

This willingness to get his hands dirty and balance one risk against another, rather than clinging to ideologically pure positions when confronted with difficult choices, sets Mr Brand apart from the many ideologues in the environmental movement. Indeed, he proudly calls himself an “eco-pragmatist”. He argues that two ideological camps have dominated the green movement for too long: “the scientists and the romantics”. The former group has been stuck in the ivory tower, while the latter has held on to noble but impractical views that, he reckons, have often been contrary to rational scientific thinking. The grip that these two rival camps have had on environmentalism, he says, explains its malaise...

As environmental issues have moved up the technological agenda, says Mr Brand, there has been a large influx of engineers into the environmental movement. These “techies” had previously been deeply sceptical of greenery, but he now thinks they may save the cause even as they save the planet. Unlike the romantics and the airy scientists, he says, “engineers focus on solving problems.”"