Science writers who focus on the environment have faced a new challenge since the appearance in 2006 of Al Gore’s über-popular book and film An Inconvenient Truth. Although it is no longer necessary to impress the urgency – let alone the existence – of climate change upon a largely science-illiterate citizenry, environmental advocates must now contend with considerable information overload. Given the glut of eco-friendly titles that have appeared in the wake of Gore’s lucrative one-two punch, making such material fresh, engaging, and informative – without sounding preachy – has become a major stumbling block.

Another downside of having a green-publishing oligarchy is the potential for complacency. This may explain why The Big Picture does not quite cohere. This latest book by longtime environmental advocate, prolific author, and CBC-TV host David Suzuki (along with journalist David Robert Taylor) falls short of the holistic synthesis it aspires to be. This collection of columns from the online site Science Matters contains, somewhat inevitably, repetition of facts and positions. Furthermore, the vernacular (close to inelegant) tone echoes the style of Suzuki’s narration on his television program, The Nature of Things. But what works well on TV or on a computer screen (simple sentences, clearly asserted) does not always translate well to the printed page. The frequent self-referential anecdotes also wear a little thin.

It could be argued that this is a small price to pay for a book that delivers some undeniably hard-hitting environmental commentary. Suzuki correctly contends that overly narrow thinking about the environment has caused no end of harm, and he urges us to see the big picture: “[B]y focusing on the parts, we often lose sight of the whole – of patterns and rhythms that make the quest interesting in the first place.” And as every ecology student learns, everything is connected.

Suzuki attacks climate change deniers (including Canada’s minority Conservative government), reductionist scientists, mega-corporations that are blind to the value of ecological services, journalists who misrepresent discoveries for the sake of a catchy headline, and just about anyone else who refuses to face reality. However, like many people full of love for the Earth, he lets his despair turn to anger and, often, derision. “Apparently, according to the average Joe, global warming is happening because we’ve created a hole in the ozone layer … or something like that.” If Joe Average were to come across this derisive swipe, he might be forgiven for stopping right there.

Quebec-born astrophysicist and popular-science author Hubert Reeves takes a different approach to the same issues in Terracide, the updated, English-language version of Mal de terre, which appeared in French in 2003, before Gore was an Academy Award winner. Despite a fairly brutal title, Reeves comes across in Donald Winkler’s able – if occasionally overly literal – translation as thoroughly knowledgeable and unwavering, but gentle. A frankly conservative principle frames his thinking: when in doubt, err on the side of caution. Unfortunately for our species and millions of others, human beings have been lax in this regard, to say the least.

Just as passionate about the Earth as Suzuki and Taylor, Reeves avoids provoking his readers (though he may scare them). An elegant writer, he assumes his readers possess an understanding of basic science, and does not condescend. Personal anecdotes are few, brief, and always pertinent. He runs through the fundamentals of his subject – air, energy, food, biodiversity, animal suffering, poverty – then outlines possible solutions to our climate change predicament. It would be pushing it to call him optimistic, yet Reeves’ litany of anthropogenic planetary ills does not come off sounding totally hopeless.

In one of Aesop’s fables, the sun and the wind have a contest to see who can convince a man to remove his coat. Battered by the wind, the man only clutches his coat more tightly. However, under the sun’s warm gaze, he takes it off. Likewise, popularizers of science must remember not to shout for attention when a well-placed whisper would do.