Q&A: Is Elizabeth Kolbert’s New Book a Hopeful Look at the Promise of 
Technology, or a Cautionary Tale?

The Pulitzer Prize-winning author calls “Under a White Sky” a “logical sequel” 
to her 2014 bestseller, “The Sixth Extinction.”

[Katelyn Weisbrod]
By [Katelyn Weisbrod](https://insideclimatenews.org/profile/katelyn-weisbrod/)
February 14, 2021

Elizabeth Kolbert's new book "Under A White Sky: The Nature of the Future" 
explores various technologies humans have used or are researching to solve the 
planet's most pressing problems. Credit: John Kleiner

Related

-

Warming Trends: A Manatee with ‘Trump’ on its Back, a Climate Version of 
Vivaldi’s Four Seasons and an Arctic Podcast

[A manatee is seen in the Homosassa River in Florida with "TRUMP" inscribed in 
the algae on its back. Credit: Hailey Warrington]
-

Warming Trends: Big Cat Against Big Cat, Michael Mann’s New Book and Trump 
Greenlights Killing Birds

[A male jaguar carries off an ocelot at a watering hole in the Maya Biosphere 
Reserve in Guatemala. Credit: Washington State University]
-

Q&A: 50 Years Ago, a Young Mother’s Book Helped Start an Environmental 
Revolution

[Frances Moore Lappé speaks at a New York City event in the late 1970s.]

Share this article

-
-
-
-

As the dominant species on the planet, humans have altered the direction rivers 
flow, modified genes to make toads less poisonous and chickens glow and someday 
could change the color of the sky.

But what happens when human creations backfire? Author Elizabeth Kolbert’s 
newest book, [“Under a White Sky: The Nature of the 
Future,”](https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/books/617060/under-a-white-sky-by-elizabeth-kolbert/)
 explores different nature-altering technologies, both in existence and in the 
abstract, and how these technologies could help solve planetary problems, or 
could become problems themselves.

Kolbert’s new book parallels her 2014 book “The Sixth Extinction”—winner of the 
2015 Pulitzer Prize for general nonfiction—about the ongoing massive extinction 
of species, which some experts attribute to humans. Both books examine Earth in 
the age of the Anthropocene—the current geological era in which humans have an 
outsized impact on the planet’s systems.

[Newsletters](https://insideclimatenews.org/newsletter)

We deliver climate news to your inbox like nobody else. Every day or once a 
week, our original stories and digest of the web’s top headlines deliver the 
full story, for free.

-
-

Today’s ClimateWeekdays

Our no-nonsense daily digest of the day’s must-read headlines from around the 
web, curated by our expert staff.

-
-

Breaking News Daily

Don’t miss a beat. Get a daily email of our original, groundbreaking stories 
written by our national network of award-winning reporters.

-
-

ICN Weekly Saturdays

Our #1 newsletter delivers the week’s climate and energy news – our original 
stories and top headlines from around the web.

-

-

Inside Clean Energy Thursdays

Dan Gearino’s habit-forming weekly take on how to understand the energy 
transformation reshaping our world.

In “Under a White Sky,” Kolbert begins with the Chicago River. More than a 
century ago, engineers reversed the flow of the polluted river away from Lake 
Michigan, which provided Chicago’s drinking water, diverting it instead into 
the Mississippi River watershed. The river’s redirection was a victory for 
public health. But it also, through the Chicago River, connected two previously 
separated watersheds—the Mississippi River and the Great Lakes—allowing species 
to move from one to the other.

As a result, watershed managers have been working tirelessly to keep invasive 
species out of the Great Lakes, including Asian carp, which could quickly 
proliferate and devastate ecosystems in all five Great Lakes. To solve that 
problem, engineers installed electrified barriers in the Chicago River to keep 
carp from the Mississippi watershed away from Lake Michigan.

“The book is about people intervening in natural systems, deciding they don’t 
particularly care for the results and then contemplating new forms of 
intervention to counter the old,” Kolbert said. “The Chicago River is a very 
vivid example of this.”

Kolbert’s book also goes through technologies that have been used to raise 
submerged land in Louisiana, rescue a threatened fish species in Nevada and 
breed coral in Australia that could resist the ocean’s changing chemistry.

Later in “Under a White Sky,” Kolbert explores some proposed technological 
fixes for climate change, like solar geoengineering, in which scientists would 
inject reflective particles into the atmosphere to reflect sunlight back into 
space, cooling the planet. But as with the rerouting of the Chicago River, 
planet-altering technologies such as this could have unintended consequences.

Inside Climate News discussed the book with Kolbert in a recent interview. This 
conversation has been lightly edited for clarity and length.

What does the title “Under a White Sky” mean?

One of the daunting challenges of climate change, it’s very difficult to do 
anything about climate change very quickly. The only idea that people have come 
up with for doing something quickly is to spray some kind of chemical compound 
into the stratosphere to create this sort of haze that would reflect sunlight 
back into space, so genuinely less direct sunlight would be hitting the Earth 
and you would have a cooling effect.

One of the many unintended or side effects of that potentially could be 
changing the appearance of the sky, the sky would appear to be whiter. If 
you’re in a part of the world where now you would expect to see a beautiful, 
blue sky on a bright day, it would have sort of a milky tinge, and that’s where 
the title comes from.

“Under a White Sky” is similar to “The Sixth Extinction” in outlining 
consequences of the Anthropocene. Does this new book serve as a follow-up or 
does it tie back to your book from 2014 in other ways?

You could kind of say it’s a logical sequel. We have created this extinction 
event being driven by a variety of different interventions in the natural 
world. And so I look at responses to, “OK we’ve made a mess, and what do we do 
now?” and I’m trying to sort of identify this way of thinking that we tend to 
bring to these problems, without necessarily taking a position on whether this 
is a good idea or not.

“Under a White Sky” outlines solutions that have aspects of natural processes 
and human-created technologies. How do these two approaches work together?

There’s a lot of talk now about these nature-based solutions, but if you look 
at them, yes, they’re inspired by natural processes but they’re not natural. 
Even if I planted a trillion trees, let’s say, I don’t think we’re doing that 
in a way that replicates a forest. We just are not in tune enough; we don’t 
have the expertise to recreate these systems, so we’re always at best 
approximating what we think nature is doing.

Are there any climate-change-mitigation or nature-saving technologies in the 
book that you find objectively promising?

I have a chapter on carbon dioxide removal, which is a very hot topic. Right 
now, it’s already sort of built into a lot of the model runs that the 
International Panel on Climate Change uses to project whether we can hold 
climate, average global temperatures, under a certain threshold, so all of the 
1.5 degree scenarios as they’re called, they all have negative emissions in 
them or some form of carbon dioxide removal and most of the 2 degree scenarios 
do too.

And is this promising? You know, potentially. One of the things I’ll say about 
the book is it tries to walk a fine line and not take a stance so much on 
whether these technologies are promising or not but to point to a habit of mind 
that we seem to have when we approach these problems.

How about technologies that are objectively scary?

I talk about several technologies that certainly provoke reservations. I have a 
chapter on gene editing and that includes a discussion of a technology called 
gene drive which sort of pushes an altered gene out into the world in a very 
dramatic way, and I think most people who have looked at gene drive, including 
people who are looking at it very seriously to try to solve problems, would say 
it certainly is perilous, it has a lot of peril associated with it. And 
certainly I think people would say that solar geoengineering has a lot of peril 
associated with it. Everything in the book raises questions.

How does the chaos of 2020 with Covid-19 play into this book?

Well I mean the chaos of 2020, unfortunately in my view, and this is one 
woman’s view, is very much in keeping with the sort of pattern that I am 
looking at in the book. Covid is natural, quote-unquote. Viruses have jumped 
species, presumably, as long as there have been viruses. But humans, it’s sort 
of this coupled human and natural system once again, a virus jumped into some 
species and then it jumped to humans, and because of the way we live now in a 
completely globalized world, it was everywhere immediately.

Even once it has spread very rapidly to incredibly remote parts of the world, 
you know, we didn’t take the steps that we could have to try and reduce as much 
as possible the spread. We sort of let it get quickly out of control. Then we 
are sitting here waiting for some techno-fix, which is a vaccine. Now we 
realize it’s so out of control that we’re going to get vaccine escape, 
probably. We’re going to have to have constantly new vaccines to deal with new 
strains of this virus so it very much in my view fits the pattern of the book.

What do you hope readers take away from this book?

I hope they take away from this book an appreciation for the really 
extraordinary moment that we live in. We live in an amazing moment, one where 
we really are the major force on planet Earth right now, we being humanity. And 
with that comes a tremendous amount of responsibility. So I’d say that the 
point of the book is to get people to appreciate how strange that is.

Is this book hopeful or a cautionary tale?

Ah, you have really gotten to the heart of the matter. I definitely leave that 
to you, dear reader. I think you can read the book and say, yes I’m more 
hopeful than when I started, there’s a lot of really smart people working on 
these problems and they have some really ingenious answers. I think that would 
be a really valid response. And I think you can read the book and say, “I’m 
terrified. I’m even more terrified than when I started the book.” Both I think 
are really reasonable responses to what’s going on.

Are there any other thoughts you have to add?

The book is kind of written as a dark comedy, and I hope that it’s kind of fun 
to read. I know that sounds odd.

Sent with [ProtonMail](https://protonmail.com/) Secure Email.

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#6440): https://groups.io/g/marxmail/message/6440
Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/80677716/21656
-=-=-
POSTING RULES & NOTES
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
-=-=-
Group Owner: [email protected]
Unsubscribe: https://groups.io/g/marxmail/leave/8674936/1316126222/xyzzy 
[[email protected]]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-


Reply via email to