Please Provide Your Ideas on a Revised Title for My New Book
I have decided that I need a last-minute course correction on the title for my next book, due out in early January. I had tentatively decided on the title “RENEWABLE AND DOABLE – Our Transition to a Clean Energy Economy that Won’t Cost Us the Earth” (later revised to “Is Renewable Really Doable?” But the more I thought about this and its spunky optimism, the more I realized that it didn’t properly reflect the actual content of the book, which, though not exactly pessimistic, is a frank treatment of the many “tough realities” facing the industry that are presented by the current political and economic scene.
To that end, I’ve tentatively chosen:
Why Renewable Energy May Never Arrive on Planet Earth
An In-Depth Look at Clean Energy’s Tough Realities
Do you mind commenting on this new title? Do you like it? Why or why not? Any further suggestions?
Thanks very much in advance.
Call it the “Renewable Future.” Otherwise, just “Renewable Noise” because much of renewable news you write about is just that.
For me, the title still looks pessimistic.
My suggestion would be to change the title something as “The Reality of Renewable Energy” or “Renewable Energy on Grounds” or something like that.
It could be argued that renewable energy has always been available on planet earth and thus doesn’t need to actually arrive! I’d stay with a degree of optimism and pose the question, “Will Renewable Energy Finally Find a Home on Planet Earth?”. Best of luck!
Echo James. It’s already here. Maybe “Will RP ever succeed on Planet Earth”
1.COME ON. MY GRAMPA SAID THESE NEW FANGLED HORSELESS CARRIAGES WILL NOT LAST. Now we have promising AND developed new age solar . I can get you the connections but you need to show interest.
I can get rid of 95% of parking lot monstrosities and shopping carts with my specialized electric assist semi recumbent trikes.
We don’t need 2000 lbs to take us shopping and for local errands. More info is available.
ron
The book is too late because renewable energy is already here. Srarted with biomass fire and evolved to power from wind and river wheels.
I think I prefer “Why A Renewable Energy Based Society May Never Arrive”. Can we see any convergence between energy demand and renewable energy available, very little at this time. Lots of smart rich people/communities going off grid but what about the rest of humanity?
I would not change the title of the book, and don´t like the new option at all. The final / complete penetration of RE sources to the societies is just a question of time. There is no much time for fossil fuels.. My point is that if we want to reach a sustainable world (let’s say in 2025…) we have to start actions TODAY and the book is one of the actions. The moment has come; go ahead!
Maybe , taking the GREEN road , to tell the many things people can do small, and big to help the environment, economy and save themself money at the same time.
Some very good books about this is the 3rd Industial Revolution which tells how the change has already begun and those who are into it are profiting and ready for the many changes the shif will bring.
First, let me say that the subtitle, “An In-Depth Look at Clean Energy’s Tough Realities”, is nearly perfect — leave it as it is. Now, you need a better title to go with it. (Or maybe, it should be the title, and you’ll need a new subtitle.)
My own attitude is that renewable energy probably cannot provide more than 30% of our overall energy needs, assuming we continue on the same path of increasing energy use. The key here is to start saving energy by making things more efficient. This will lower our overall carbon footprint, and make it possible for renewable energy to seem bigger by grabbing a same-size slice of a smaller pie.
My own LeviCar / RoboTrail concept does this by using a hyperefficient Magnetic-Levitation network for medium- and long- distance transportation of people and freight, vastly more efficient than planes and trucks, and also more efficient than conventional rail (see website). Now that I’m done plugging my own ideas, let’s get back to coming up with a new title for your book.
The original title and subtitle: “RENEWABLE AND DOABLE – Our Transition to a Clean Energy Economy that Won’t Cost Us the Earth.” exudes optimism. The term “Clean Energy Economy” implies the need for both alternative energy sources and greater efficiency.
The proposed title and subtitle: “WHY RENEWABLE ENERGY MAY NEVER ARRIVE ON PLANET EARTH – An In-Depth Look at Clean Energy’s Tough Realities” is too pessimistic, particularly the phrase “May Never Arrive”. As others have commented, Renewable Energy has already arrived.
Without having seen even an outline of the book, I’m not sure what it covers. How much of it is devoted to increased energy efficiency, not only in transportation, but also better insulation, lifestyle changes, cogeneration, etc.
I’m sorry that I did not come up with an alternate title. I plan to go offline for a while, read further comments, and then get back to you. Thank you.
I agree with the two posters above. Since Renewable Energy has been here since the dawn of civilization one has to wonder if it isn’t more the case that man has lost touch with Planet Earth and the important body of work done by many who have come before us. It is not like we haven’t already invented technology that is capable of harvesting renewable resources, but more the will of the people and governments to Do it. As long as we have enough fossil fuels that are cheaper and already powering our transportation and industrial base there won’t be a large enough market for renewable resource products to make a dent in the near future. The key to unlocking this market is “affordability” which comes with massive demand hence the conundrum we currently face.
I think the title is too long and pessimistic.
I suggest:
CLEAN ENERGY CLEAN EARTH
Ciao
Aldo
The proposed title below is too negative.
WHY RENEWABLE ENERGY MAY NEVER ARRIVE ON PLANET EARTH
An In-Depth Look at Clean Energy’s Tough Realities
The title is not realistic in view of the fact that renewable energy planet-wide is growing impressively. Of course many challenges exists but these are being tackled.
Hopefully the chapters in the book is addresses and dicusses these.
Pushing wind, water and sunshine….uphill
Is Renewable Still Doable? (let the graphics make it clear the subject is renewable energy)
Another possibility,
DEATH VALLEY for RENEWABLE ENERGY
An In-Depth Look at Clean Energy’s Tough Realities
titel wiill bee beter ‘WHY RENEWABLE ENERGY MAY
NEVER ARİVE İN ”’ AMERİCA”’
This is a 180 deg turn on the title highlighting the book content.
Do you really mean, we are doomed?
Besides the current hypes, there are still many approaches to get renewable as the main energy source. And I have just the design which I am sure it will be the game changer. It doesn’t cost much to build, but have to wait awhile for me to save enough money.
So I strongly suggest you should retain the former title.
your revised title is way too pessimistic and certainly wouldn’t encourage me to pick it off the bookstore shelf. My suggestion is “Renewable and doable – an in-depth look at the transition to a clean energy economy”
I suggest you keep it positive, because it is. And keep it short to attract those 3 second readers. Check out New Net Clean Energy Investor to see all of the deals that are going down in renewable energy and perhaps you won’t feel so pessimistic. If you look at what is happening outside of the US (and inside, in some cases) you’ll see that a great deal of money is being invested around the world. And what other choice is there? Renewable energy is our only hope for survival on this planet. Period. Thanks for the opportunity to comment.
Having been in the advertising world for over 30 years I feel the need to inform you that pessimism and negativity never sold anything. If scare tactic advertising is used you may sell an item but you haven’t created a return customer which is why well over half the country doesn’t adhere to ideological climate change thinking.Remain positive and at least offer optimism. Also remember – like a freeway bill board, the title of a book gets 2.25 seconds to sell it’s contents; keep it simple.
Sticking with the theme ‘Renewable, but Doable?’
After looking at all the other comments, I’d go with what Bill Paul suggested, but keeping the subtitle:
IS RENEWABLE STILL DOABLE?
“An In-Depth Look at Clean Energy’s Tough Realities”
This ought to sell.
Hi Mr.Craig Shields, how are you?
I would suggest a title of “Why is the World Not Embracing And Fast Tracking Clean Green Renewable Energy?” though the title is a bit of a mouthful!
By the way Mr. Craig Shields did you recieve my earlier message? I am on Skype now.
Best Regards
Luimack Johnson
Madang
Papua New Guinea
Think it should be in the form of a question….?….then the focus or goal of book is to answer that question. I think more readers would want to read and get to the answers. It gives readers a goal to reach as well.
You could add a question mark to ‘Renewable & Doable?’ or ‘Is Renewable really Doable?
From a marketing pov, who are your audience? Do you really want a pessimistic title? If so who will be your audience?
‘Renewable Realities?’ could interest both sides & has a nice ring for generating some debate from reviews, always useful if you want to generate sales. Whatever you choose keep it short & simple, ask yourself who would pick up this title, and if it doesn’t appeal to the widest target market keep searching. Good Luck.
your title sounds more like a subtitle… i would go with something like:
TOUGH TO BE CLEAN
Why Renewable Energy May Never Arrive on Planet Earth
Craig, your book’s aim is to provide candid examination of the tough realities facing the industry. Your success in achieving this goal depends on how well your message resonates inter-generationally. In my opinion, your original title creates greater impact than your second (tentative)title because your purpose for writing the book can be processed in digestible “sound bytes”, while the second title immediately creates disincentive and negativity,implying inability to achieve a critically important goal.
You might consider the following title option:
RENEWABLE and DOABLE – The Realities,the Cost,and the Value of Moving Toward a Renewable Energy Culture.
Art Ryan
Less of the pessimism Craig,
Wind power electricity generation tenders in Brazil and Uruguay are now coming in cheaper than gas powered generation!
‘Energy Economics after Renewable Breakthrough’ should be a title for the next book.
Keep up the good work,
Aedan
Hard to title when I don’t know the content. Here’s a split the difference on optimism / pessimism.
Renewable Energy – Tipping Points
I’ll humbly suggest the title:
RENEWING THE RENEWABLE DREAM: An X-Ray of Challenges of Turning Clean Energy’s Dream into Reality!
Too long, and therefor, too boring. Meaning: probably, it wont get read/purchased/cared about… Just go for the Sub-title and skip the main part.
Renewable Energy is already used by millions so your title is a bit inaccurate. Also, the title you propose here prefigures the result of your research too much. That title would be appropriate for a white paper or report, but not a book for the reason that books titles should set out the scope and framework of the content but not the result. The result should emerge from the reading of the book. Otherwise, there is less reason for the reader to spend the time reading your book and not others. I already know one other guy that will be coming out with a book next year on the subject, not to mention Amory’s book!
I’m not comfortable with “Why Renewable Energy May Never Arrive on Planet Earth”. For me it carries the implication that you believe it will not happen. Something like “Will Renewable Energy Ever Arrive on Planet Earth?” I think would be better. And even your first version I find better. Perhaps “Is Renewable Doable?” A short catchy phrase that can be expounded in the subtitle.
I like the expression “…a Clean Energy Economy that Won’t Cost Us the Earth” in your first subtitle choice. If it could be combined somehow with your thinking in your second subtitle suggestion? Eg. “The Tough Realities challenging a Transition To a Clean Energy Economy that Won’t Cost Us the Earth”.
Generally your second title and subtitle combination choice feels more boring than your first. We must not let the seriousness of realities bog us down so that we become burdened and seriously boring.
I think you need a MUCH shorter title that is memorable and punchy. Take a look at the NY Times Bestseller list for examples FIVE WORDS MAX; two or three preferred.
Too dooming, pro-renewables won’t buy it, cons neither. And as many are pointing, “renewable” sounds too worn out. I suggest you avoid it, and would go for something on the lines of “Fossil views vs. Clean earth, the fight of doom” (not necessarily that one!) but simply conveying the idea of a confrontation between two sets of approaches to energy usage and that there is something really important in the outcome .. humm, I see that I agree with David Benjamin … Subtitle is very accurate (I guess) but then too long, should remain then as a subtitle.
suggested title:
renewable energy – the only saviour of the planet
renewable energy – the insurance against future disaster
planet protection through renewable energy
modify as required maintaining the message
New subtitle really works, but new title is way too long and way too pessimistic –are you pitching the book to deniers? I’d take your original title and just add a question mark: “Renewable and Doable?”
How about simply ‘Renewable Earth?’ plus your subtitle? All the best from a Friend in Malta
No intelligent response is possible without reading the book first…
Nevertheless, beased on your query and your obvious knowledge of the book’s contents, how about a take on your original title: Is Renewable Doable? An In-Depth Look at Clean Energy’s Tough Realities
“It Is The Economy of Renewables, Stupid”.
Or is it not?
“It Is The Economy of Renewables, Stupid”.
Or is it not?
Craig, I agree with many who say your new title is too pessistic, also not accurate. After all, I and many others have already increased our use of and reliance on RE ! My total whole-house and office energy cost for 2010 was less than $1000, which is less than half of what is typical in my region for a building of my home’s size. Not all my savings is due to RE supplies. A lot is due to conservation and efficiency. Heck, I am hangdrying a load of laundry right now, outside on a clothesline! Means I don’t need 5 kWh of coal-fired or RE electricity to run my dryer.
I think your pessimism is more about our nation’s politics than RE. In so many ways, our nation’s politics right now is disfunctional, corrupt, inept. Our budgets have squandered and wasted our moneys, even taken from our trust funds with no repayment plans. Now we’re broke, and we have HUGE debts to repay as a nation. Sickening. Had to laugh yesterday when I heard that Italy’s new government contains NO POLITICIANS! After all, the Italian politicians seem a lot like ours, leading us into ruin, free stuff and money now in exchange for oblivion later. To take Italy’s lesson one step further, imagine that we don’t need anything from our disfunctional, corrupt or inept politicians to implement a huge and progressive amount of conventional energy reduction. That’s how I did it in my current house. Same with most of my customers 1983 to now. Believe it or not, there have been many EE and RE projects implemented around our nation without any politics.
When we have an advertised or expected potential of subsidies and incentives, it sometimes stifles what would happen in the absence of expected subsidies. People and companies hold off and wait for the subsidies. I certainly saw this dynamic back in early 80s when Reagan was dismantling the Carter subsidies. Many people waiting on subsidies or sitting on fenses simply decided to do stuff on their own. Including me.
Maybe your pessimism is more about big business losing support. Well, most RE businesses in my region are small. Many small RE business were in place before current subsidies, including where I bought my own RE stuff. But you are right that most new bigger RE businesses in my region are heavily dependent on the current subsidies. This is scary to me, since I recall all the big RE business failures as Reagan removed similar subsidies in the 1980s…
I got a call from a local technical college, asking if I could hire one of their RE associate-degree students. I said I was not hiring, that I was not an RE installer or mfr but instead a more broadly focused energy consultant and designer. I asked if they taught students how to setup their own businesses, how to become sole proprietors or small partnerships. After all, this is how most RE companies are setup in my region. Heck, I started my own company in Dec 1983 only because I couldn’t find any firms or companies to hire me! Been self-employed ever since! The school’s caller responded that they were a “co-op college”. I guess that meant “no, we don’t teach about self-employment.” But becoming self-employed, getting no subsidies and working from a home office taught me early to walk my talk as well as to be conservative with how I spend my and my customers’ moneys.
So I say don’t be pessimistic. Look for and write about what IS getting done. Be more inclusive, focusing on ALL the ways to reduce conventional energy use, not just RE. Document progress not by how much money is spent or subsidies offered, but by how much less conventional energy and pollution is required, project by project.
How much conventional energy does my home office use these days? None. Nov 2011 is my 10th year running all plug loads in an off-grid PV + batteries powered office. 1.6 kW of grid-tied demand permanently removed from the grid for 10 yrs! Today (Thurs) is 1st sunny day since last Sat. So today I’m recharging batteries which kept me using PV power all week despite persistent rain and heavy clouds. Even though it’s 40s outside, my house will be mid70s by time my wife gets home, because of our solar heating. And our well-insulated hot water storage tank will be full and ready with solar-heated water for our morning showers and dishes. Even as I sit here typing on my solar-powered computer, I am burning no lightbulbs because I have a daylit office. Nothing pessimistic about any of that!
I like “Wall Street vs Renewable Energy”
It is after all the bankers that don’t consider external costs imposed on society by our current energy system.
Why not be authentic and honest!?
Use the Title: The Late Planet Earth: unable to face reality
In short, without first having assimilated its content, I can’t really offer appropriate suggestion as to its title. The current revised title is certainly fine if it accurately reflects the content within. If you are so inclined, “RENEWABLE AND DOABLE” with subtitle does appeal to my senses. I suggest that you give consideration to saving that one for your next book – being the focus thereof.
Come on, Craig, this is far too negative. I hope the book is not so negative, as, if this attitude prevails, the human race is doomed (not the earth, of course; it has at least five billion more years before the sun runs out of fuel, and doesn’t need us humans; it will simply delete us and go on to some other experiment, if we can not adjust). A switch to renewables not only can, but must, happen.
Last Tuesday, I attended a public panel discussion on energy and the environment, sponsored by the Professional Engineers of Ontario. One of the panelists (I don’t have his name at hand right now, but can get that information), who spoke passionately about climate change issues, showed a diagram, which you can recreate by following these instructions: on the left side of a piece of paper, draw a large circle, a smaller circle, and a still smaller one, slightly overlapping each other. Label the smallest one “business”, the middle one “people” and the large one “environment”. On the right side, recreate this, but this time placing the small circle within the middle circle, and both within the large one.
The left diagram represents the view of “reality” that we seem to accept and guides all our economic and political policy choices; the right diagram represents the real situation that exists on planet earth. As he put it “business is a wholly-owned subsidiary of the environment.”
The greatest barrier to renewables is not technical; it’s our faulty vision.
One thing we seem to overlook is that we don’t need to replace XkWh of fossil fuel derived energy with XkWh of renewable energy. When all costs are considered (that means internalizing the externalities, and counting all the beans), our fossil fuel and nuclear industries spend most of their energy spinning their own wheels; when that energy production is off-loaded to renewables, much of this overhead goes away. For example, the electrical energy expended in extracting and refining one gallon of gasoline will drive a Nissan Leaf 60 miles; the hydrogen used to desulfurize and de-aromatize the gasoline for our gasoline powered vehicles would provide more than half of the required needs of a similar-sized fleet of fuel cell powered vehicles.
There are no gasoline wells out there. It takes a lot of energy and resources to make it. If all costs were internalized there would be no way it could compete with renewables. But we are paying the externalized costs in one way or another. Once we recognize this, I’m sure we will soon find a way to move to renewables.
My thanks to all who provided an opinion on my (admittedly pessimistic) title for my new book. Please see: http://2greenenergy.com/book-on-renewable-energy/17002/. I’m dropping that title like a hot potato.
Dear Craig;
Name your Book:RENEWABLE ENERGY REALITIES….
Please not so pessimistic (and also nor attractive nor correct statement)
Why not assert:
RENEWABLE IS DOABLE
plus the second subtitle, which is super, and clearly explains what the book is about
I agree with most of the comments telling you it’s too long and pessimistic.
How about : • Clean energy has arrived but will it stay?
• Coming clean with renewable energy.
• The dirty truth about clean energy.
• The dirty fight for clean energy.
• Sustainable thoughts on energy.
• Have you heard the one about renewable energy?
It’s no joke.
• If you have a big craving for energy don’t read this book.
• A spotless look into renewable energy.
• A planet in denial.
• Are we there yet… Are we there yet?
Subhead: The road to renewable energy
• It’s all fun and games until the planet gets really hurt.
Your title needs a little something unexpected. Inject a little humor.
I was just spitballing here. Best of luck.
That title sounds like Fox News Propaganda, We are finally where Clean, Green, is is cutting the Mustard! Hot Mustard. The wind has spoken. Bye Bye Old ways, we are here to stay. etc
Greg Chick Green Plumber Trainer.
I would vote for
Renewable Realities
“An In-Depth Look at Clean Energy’s Tough Realities”
Keep in mind that in the very long run ALL energy sources will need to be renewable or they simply run out.
Even with 70% growth per year, in five years solar electrical generation will still be a rounding error (about .66%).
In 10 years solar energy solar for will still be below 10% of the total needs ( http://2greenenergy.com/wanted-people/16351/).
However if there is an inflection in 4 years with and inflection then solar can be at about 25% in 10 years.
If you look at RE as a quickly growing market, you will think it is fantastic. If you look at RE as a set of technologies that can save the world (or at least start it heading in the right direction) then you have strong reason to be pessimistic (at least from a US position). As long as burn tech doesn’t have to pay for their externalities it will be a difficult journey.
It reminds me of a story:
There was a big storm and there where hundreds of starfish stranded on the beach. A little boy was throwing some of these starfish back into the ocean when a man asked the boy why he was doing this because he couldn’t save all the starfish on the beach and it won’t make a difference. The boy responded “Maybe not, but it makes a big difference for this one” as he threw another starfish back into the ocean.
Some bright spots are:
Germany is now over 20% Renewable Energy.
One of my favorite articles is about a solar concentrator company that uses it’s modules to provide
“100% of the North Las Vegas facility’s energy needs”
http://news.cnet.com/8301-11128_3-57325927-54/solar-begets-solar-at-amonix-factory/
P.S. Please make sure you mention energy savings in your book. It is typically 1/10 the cost to save energy than to create it or “A negawatt beats a Megawatt”.
Hi Craig,
I agree the title is too long and doesn’t reflect your usual viewpoint. I’m glad to see you are going to change it. I agree with Bill you need a shorter title and like Bill I’ve thrown a few more suggestions in the mix (although they are still too long), just to add your cornucopia of suggested titles
Renewable energy: the tough realities facing the planet
The hard yards to a renewable energy future
Green dreams and ugly realities
Subhead: The road to renewable energy
Overcoming the barriers to renewable energy
You may as well try and catch the wind
Subhead: Renewable energy realities
The big hopes and ugly facts of renewable energy
My six cents worth is don’t forget the audience you already have before trying to extend your sphere of influence in fresher fields. Short and snappy titles are always best, but humour doesn’t always work when you want to be taken seriously. Good luck with your new choice.
Renewable Energy is Still a Dream.
OR
Renewable Energy, Can we Catch the Wind? Stop a Raging Flood? Catch the Sunshine in our Hands? Perhaps Tomorrow!
I also feel this title is too harsh.
On the other hand it is ok to start with a worrysome call, but the subtitle should show some hope for the future.
possibly just expanding to … and possibilities.
I have no problem with long titles.
Renewable Energy – Puppet Of Politics
There are so many hurdles and loops to jump threw in some areas, mostly caused by the utilities who claim to be working with us and want to take the credit for anything that is accomplished. Politicians have their hand so deep into the pockets of the utility companies they are grabbing a lot more then just money and now because they have done that they a scared to do the right thing because the Utility Will Scream RAPE !
The title is so very inappropriate looking to the progress made by renewables, apart from the fact that the world needs to move to a low carbon era in order to leave the planet livable for our future generations. I will give you one simple personal example. I have a solar water heater which gives me as much hot water as I want any time of the day and I do’nt have to worry about paying any electricity or fuel bill. At least so much of favourable legacy I will leave for my future generations!!!
That’s awful!
Bucky Fuller said to change an old model you have to present a new vision that is possible before the deniers can get on board …
I hate your surrender before the battle tone implied by your new book title. Struggles that give rise to major change often look impossible just before the tipping point. I grew up in the south before the shift in civil rights took place. Things looked bleak for civil rights of black people in the USA, with entrenched segregationists holding most elective offices including especially sheriffs, until the tipping point came suddenly in 1958. While having your nose rubbed in the endless BS of the fossil fuel people may wear you down, please to surrender to such a downbeat title!
I just invested in a 26 panel solar PV array in Miami, which should provide 85% of my current usage and qualified for a Florida Power and Light (FPL) rebate of $2/W. FPL has historically opposed home owned PV, so this is a significant change in attitude from a major utility. While this is a small program, with only $15million over 5 years, there could be a sea change, if their 2 Nukes at Turkey Point proposal is turned down based upon environmental concerns(like rising sea level). The money being set aside for the Nukes could make a massive solar rebate program fly in a short time.
I am Still Optimistic that Solar will Win in Florida! I think the rapid decline in global PV prices will dramatically shift the debate. Together with 100 dollar per Barrel oil which is just the start as the global economy picks up steam, in the face of peak oil. We need to keep the tar sands oil from being piped to Houston, to keep the upward fossil fuel prices and to put a lid on coal fired power plants.
Why?
Sea Level is forecast by the U. S, Army Corp. of Engineers to rise between 3 feet and 6 feet in the next 100 years depending upon energy reform or business as usual. If the 6 foot rise verifies, sea level will then be rising at a rate of one foot per decade and coastal communities will be toast around the world.
Coastal Florida properties like mine have increasingly frequent sea water flooding on normal high tides during the Fall. Sea water simply comes up through street drains (sources?). This is not a problem for a distant future time. Occasionally, I have to drive my plug-in Prius on the sidewalk to avoid the salt water on high tides.
The four Southeastern counties in Florida, Miami-Dade, Broward, Palm Beach and Monroe, have united in a Climate Compact, to use the Corp of Engineers forecast for our future planning. I am trying to interest the Southwestern Florida Counties to joint the Climate Compact. Do you have any idea what it will cost to surrender the USA’s coastal cities to the rising ocean? Renewable energy might be 1% of that cost.
You are absolutely right in projecting an alarmist tone. Too many people whistling their merry tunes of optimism has only bred too much complacency and continued consumerism in our modern civilization while our problems continue to mount threatening the future of our civilization.
False sense of security (the “somebody’ll figure out something” syndrome) + an extremist conservative political revival + free market mispricing of finite resources + public debt (making massive public investment virtually impossible) + peak oil + increasing diversion of economic resources toward unconventional fossil fuel recovery (and declining EROEI) + increasing developing world demand (at subsidized prices) + increasing oil exporting country demand (also at subsidized prices) + increasing incidence and cost of pollution + a distorted climate debate + likelihood of permanent recession due to rising energy cost + a few other things I won’t go into here make the calculus of ever developing what I call “TERFO” (The Energy Replacement For Oil) a bleak prospect for our civilization’s future. I would like to contribute to this book!
How about:
“To be Renewable” :
Our Transition to a Clean Energy Economy that Won’t Cost Us the Earth.”
well renewable energy reaches the earth everyday, so that title is basically a lie. Without reading the book, how can anyone give a title. Perhaps you should scan your words within the book and find some relative term there….
Way too pessimistic!
Seeing the title, although it may be true, does not make me want to run out and snatch it up to read it. I think the book title should be something similar to a job interview; one would boast their highlights to peak the interviewers interested so they will want to know more.
Anyone who has given you a title without having read the book is basically blind folded, spun in circles and throwing darts at board for which they have know idea which wall it hangs.
Hope this helps!
the title is too long and pessimistic
make it short
something like LETS HARRY FOR RENEWABLE ENERGY
best luck and sucses
turhan
Craig
Not having read the book it is difficult to comment objectively but I liked your original title “RENEWABLE AND DOABLE – Our Transition to a Clean Energy Economy that Won’t Cost Us the Earth” because I do belive that we have the technologies to do this, albeit some, although proven, are not quite at the comercial scale yet. I am sure we could produce renewable electricity at current coal prices which includes economic storage for 24/7 supplies, whether we can overcome the socio/political hurdles to implement these is another story as it will often require international cooperation. Your suggested new title “Why Renewable Energy May Never Arrive on Planet Earth” to me is too negative, I can only assume that you are taking the view that humans are too self centred at the individual or possibly national level to ever work together in order to solve our energy challenges before it’s too late. What we, the human race, need to ask ourselves is; do we want the whole human race to survive or aren’t we bothered?
Craig,
Having been born pessimist (as most of us Finns, I’ve been told…) I still liked Your original title better, rhyme and all, but (here’s where the pessimism kicks in) combined with Your 2nd version’s subtitle, something like this:
RENEWABLE AND DOABLE – UNLESS…
– An In-Depth Look at Clean Energy’s Tough Realities –
You need a “hook” in the title to draw readers into the book, something like “What’s keeping renewable energy from overtaking fossil fuels in the 21st century?
Renewable is one thing, cleantech is another. Renewable are not 100% clean, (i.e. photovoltic, fiberglass on wind blade are not clean). I remeber when I was in college, people called nuclear was clean energy…Peter is right, title is a hook. I wish the book could also mention the political road blocks to clean/renewable energy. Why US pushes Japan, Taiwan to buy nuclear reactors, why big oil & big coal are blackmailing us through politicians. Could you please post a table of content so we could suggest a name? Thx!