Geo-engineering: Earth's salvation or Forlorn Hope

[pscot]

Geo-engineering as a way of extricating ourselves from the problems caused by global warming is a controversial topic. This is a long and thought provoking article that looks at some of the possibilities, and explores the ethical and geo-political dimensions of such efforts.The quotes were selected at random to give the flavor of the piece.

http://www.earthisland.org/journal/index.php/eij/article/hacking_the_sky/

-----
What if the planet has gone permanently haywire? As the effects of climate change become obvious and global leaders remain unable to halt emissions, a growing number of scientists say we need to begin researching what’s called “geo-engineering” – ways to artificially reduce global temperatures and/or manipulate plants or the oceans to absorb huge amounts of CO2. Having unintentionally warmed the planet, we may have little choice but to intentionally cool it back down.
------
The mixed emotions surrounding geo-engineering hint at a dark mood. Among those who understand the climate science best, there is a creeping resignation that we won’t make the hard choices necessary to halt catastrophic global warming. This is, it seems to me, a staggering admission just at a time when, to avert disaster, we need a buoyant sense of potential. If mitigation (reducing emissions) is the hope of the idealist, and adaptation (preparing for rising waters) is the consolation of the realist, then geo-engineering (call it circumvention) has become the refuge of the cynic. Geo-engineering assumes that although we may be able to alter how the planet works, we are incapable of changing the way we run the world.
-------
“There should be government funding for geo-engineering,” says Alan Robock, a Rutgers University meteorologist who has a National Science Foundation grant to investigate geo-engineering. Last year, Robock published a paper in The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists titled “20 Reasons Why Geoengineering May Be a Bad Idea.” “Let’s say there was a global warming emergency,” he told me. “Policy makers would want to know, Would it work? Could we do it? Should we do it? And right now we don’t know how to advise them. But if there is no Plan B, we should know that too.”

[Taverner]

1. Its a good idea, but always be wary of the law of unintended consequences...

[BlooInBloo]

2. I miss SimEarth so much. Best. Game. Ever.

[pscot]

3. Wait 'til you see the new version

We're gonna be playing for keeps.

[izquierdista]

4. We have already geo-engineered the planet

Except it's been done without any drawings, calculations, or plans. The locust has been eradicated from North America by the moldboard plow. The woods of Illinois have been replaced with corn and soybean fields. The course of the Mississippi has been changed so silt no longer piles up in barrier islands. Contrails from jet aircraft have changed rainfall patterns. Sheep ranching has desertified large swaths of Australia. The Colorado river was diverted to form the Salton Sea.

No, the question is not "should we geo-engineer the planet", the question is "are we going to THINK, analyze and plan for the results before we do the next geo-engineering project".

[populistdriven]

5. we are in the process of terraforming the planet for our new aquatic plant overlords

[pscot]

7. Umm. I thought that was jellyfish

n/t

[IDemo]

6. Even if this worked well and showed results in dramatically short time,

the lowered CO2 numbers would be taken as a signal by much of the PTB on Planet Earth to forge ahead full speed with carbon-based fuels.

[Nihil]

8. +1 (n/t)