Subtitled The Challenge of Global Warming, Generation Us is like a climate change CliffNotes. Published by Raven Books as part of a “Rapid Reads” series, this is a short, succinct, clear and readable rendering of the science – followed by a passionate appeal for us all to move from “Generation Me” (which really seems to have outlasted its stylishness) to Generation Us, in which we start taking seriously the opportunity we have to mitigate the climate damage that we have already inflicted on future generations.

VANCOUVER, BRITISH COLUMBIA–(Marketwire – April 21, 2010) – University of Victoria Professor Andrew Weaver, the Canada Research Chair in Climate Modelling and Analysis, launched a lawsuit today in BC Supreme Court against three writers at The National Post (and the newspaper as a whole), over a series of unjustified libels based on grossly irresponsible falsehoods that have gone viral on the Internet.
In a statement released at the same time the suit was filed, Dr. Weaver said, “I asked The National Post to do the right thing – to retract a number of recent articles that attributed to me statements I never made, accused me of things I never did, and attacked me for views I never held. To my absolute astonishment, the newspaper refused.”
Dr. Weaver’s statement of claim not only asks for a Court injunction requiring The National Post to remove all of the false allegations from its Internet websites, but also seeks an unprecedented Court order requiring the newspaper to assist Dr. Weaver in removing the defamatory National Post articles from the many other Internet sites where they have been re-posted.
“If I sit back and do nothing to clear my name, these libels will stay on the Internet forever. They’ll poison the factual record, misleading people who are looking for reliable scientific information about global warming,” said Weaver.
The suit names Financial Post Editor Terence Corcoran, columnist Peter Foster, reporter Kevin Libin and National Post publisher Gordon Fisher, as well as several still-unidentified editors and copy editors. It seeks general, aggravated damages, special and exemplary damages and legal costs in relation to articles by Foster on December 9, 2009 (“Weaver’s Web”), Corcoran on December 10, 2009 (“Weaver’s Web II”) and January 27, 2010 (“Climate Agency going up in flames”), and Libin on February 2, 2010 (“So much for pure science”).
The Statement of Claim was filed April 20, 2010 at the BC Supreme Court Registry at the Vancouver Courthouse: Weaver v Corcoran and others, SCBC No.102698, Vancouver Registry. Court record information and documents are publicly accessible online at Court Services Online: https://eservice.ag.gov.bc.ca/cso/index.do.

In the fight over clean energy, will ‘environmentalists’ stand with science?
By Andrew Weaver March 23, 2009

“Switching from fossil fuels to emissions-free energy sources is not going to happen without resistance. Each new hydro and wind project is being opposed by well-meaning citizens and environmental groups not familiar with the science. Each energy conservation policy is fought bitterly by “public interest groups” demagoguing to keep energy subsidized. Each attempt to tax carbon and each law to reduce emissions draws the fossil fuel lobby into action alongside these “public interest” groups.

The public debate has become a caricature. People complain about windmills blocking their view. Kayakers complain about seeing a transmission line on their weekend excursions. The public dialogue is riddled with outlandish and demonstrably false assertions such as windmills will devastate local bird populations or a hydro project will create more greenhouse emissions than it will displace by eliminating a coal-burning power plant. Some of the most insidious arguments attempt to slow things down: That we should do more planning, that we should do energy conservation first and build renewable energy later, that we shouldn’t do anything until China does.

These arguments are fundamentally not serious. They come from groups and spokespeople that have simply not grappled with the math — with the scale and speed at which we must eliminate fossil fuel emissions.”

He agrees the crux of his book comes down to a single alarming sentence on page 28: “People have simply no idea how serious this issue is.”

It’s so serious, he said, that unless we reach a point where we stop emitting greenhouse gases entirely, 80 per cent of the world’s species will become extinct, and human civilization as we know it will be destroyed, by the end of this century.

“It looks like the unprecedented desire to vote for the environment could result in a terrible three way split of environmental voters in key ridings. Elizabeth May and her appeal have an extraordinary opportunity to make the change the Green movement wants to see in our government. Ms. May and the Greens alone can help make the difference between the Harper majority that the climate scientists fear and a Liberal minority under which great progress can be made to fight climate change.”

Few Canadians understand the science of climate change as well as University of Victoria professor Andrew Weaver. Not only is he chief editor of the highly-respected Journal of Climate, he was a lead author of the last three major reports published by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, and thus a co-recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize.

University of Victoria climatologist Dr. Andrew Weaver, Canada’s answer to James Hansen, continues to win rave reviews and political attention for his new book, Keeping Our Cool.

On policy, the book I would most recommend is George Monbiot’s Heat. It doesn’t necessarily discuss all possible policies, and some of his specific prescriptions may be wrong, but the book makes a convincing case of why we need to act, as well as what acting effectively would involve.

Joseph Romm’s Hell and High Water: Global Warming – the Solution and the Politics and What We Should Do focuses on the US and has some biases. Nonetheless, it is a useful work written by someone who has a firm grip on the issues.

Jeffrey Simpson’s Hot Air: Meeting Canada’s Climate Change Challenge is a bit like Weaver’s book, in that it is somewhat stronger on analysis than policy recommendation. Still, it does quite a good job of evaluating some of the policies that have already been put in place.

Broecker’s Fixing Climate: What Past Climate Changes Reveal About the Current Threat–and How to Counter It provides an unusual perspective on possible solutions, focusing on capturing CO2 straight out of the air.

Would this be comprehensible to laypeople?

Also, what books do a better job of discussing policy?