Review: Energy and Civilization: A History

Energy transitions take time. That's the big takeaway. That's the terrifying takeaway. This should be obvious if you sit down and think about it, but when we describe our economic history with phrases like "agricultural revolution" and "industrial revolution" we start getting ahead of ourselves. These revolutions took millennia and centuries.

And we only have decades before our planet burns. What revolution can we expect?

Smil shies away from those that would try to paint every with the brush of energy- art? war? politics? These are largely independent a civilization's energy usage. Yet, its energy usage and its economy might as well be one and the same. As energy is fed into a civilization, like a rainforest basking in the tropics, the kind of life inside diversifies, extends, and mutates to reach the limits that physics will allow.

The biggest invention in the history of humanity was the slow transition from using wood energy to using coal, oil, and gas. This transition increased the amount of energy available to any individual in the developed world by many magnitudes access to energy. This powered the economic growth following the world wars, and until the 1970s, the efficiencies of American produced cars were going down due to the cheapness of oil.

Of course, it is in the 1970s when economic growth in the developed world went from a joy ride to a car stuck in traffic. The reason: energy prices rose.

We now face an ecological problem brought on by our energy use, that threatens the economy that our energy use props up. There are two broad categories of solution: (1) limit our energy usage and (2) change our energy use.

Smil does not have much faith in the latter: over the course of the last fifty, or even fifteen, years the piece of the energy pie inhabited by renewables has hardly changed. To truly save much of civilization, we must get that number -15%- to near 100% within a few decades. We've never done that before is Smil's strongest argument.

But I would argue that this transition is different. For one, we know we have to make the change. The King of England wasn't telling Watt to invent a steam engine. No priest ever told the hunters and gathers to start domesticating animals. The Green Energy revolution, if we are to have one, is a planned revolution started from the bottom and the top.

Limiting our energy usage is obvious, but more contentious. We have to stop driving so many cars? Eat less meat? Stop building cheaply built McMansions with no insulation? These seem to be an affront to people's basic liberties, and yet every time they make these choices they help dig us a little bit deeper into carbon debt.

Smil's history is broad and deep. It reaches into the tiny fragments of Roman, Chinese and prehistory that you didn't know where out there. It discusses the differences between whether an ox or a horse are best on a farm, and what their energy efficiencies are relative to one another. He uses sharp illustrations makes clear that two 747 pilots control more energy than entire medieval communities would have had at their disposal.

Most of all, he provides the context for understanding today's economic and ecological problems that have resulted from our historical use of energy.