Oh no I'm reviewing a book about "the six raw materials that make civilization" and I'm already furious at it because it conflates sand and rock quartz
I just. Think. If you want to write about silica just say that!! Calling it sand is sloppy!!
Also has lines like "Sand is what will help us pull millions out of destitution and poverty" re: concrete and that "us" vs "millions" makes some interesting assumptions!! Also he's talking about concrete which, my guy
So after the author goes all gee whiz concrete can end poverty, he gets into the carbon footprint of it and all the negative impacts which to me reads as very like "we can solve poverty or stop climate change but not both!!" Seems like a bad way to frame this!
To be fair this book is basically "an economist just found out commodities are real things from places" my expectations should be lower
