PositiveThe Washington PostShe describes geology in plain English, recounts the rise and fall of one of the country’s most flamboyant shale gas tycoons, and studies the political consequences of a United States that is far less dependent on oil imports than it was just a decade ago. In each case, informed by her experience in financial affairs, McLean has cautionary words about the limits of U.S. output, the financial perils of betting on shale exploration stocks and the dangers of believing that the United States is somehow free from the geopolitics of petroleum ... She brings a sensible financial eye to the Trump administration’s talk about American \'energy dominance\' and the \'believers\' who think technology will help the country outgrow its petroleum problem.
Richard Rhodes
PositiveThe Washington PostRhodes is keenly aware of the environmental damage that different forms of energy have caused ... Yet Rhodes writes with confidence ... To frame his argument, Rhodes turns energy development into a story. He weaves together short portraits of scientists and inventors alongside detailed descriptions of technical challenges to advancement ... It’s a big tableau with entertaining personal details ... The stories are engaging, though at times one feels that the profiles stack up one on top of another, with details that could have been pruned.
Meg Jacobs
PositiveThe Washington PostIt was, Jacobs argues persuasively, a time that transformed American politics. Democrats and Republicans fought among themselves as well as with each other over how best to respond. Many Americans worried that an era of boundless optimism, economic growth and prosperity would give way to limits and scarcity. Others came away convinced that the United States would have to boost its military capabilities and be ready to fight to protect its economic as well as national security ... At a time when political candidates are bickering over how to make America great again, there is much to recommend in this book.
