Geoengineering for Decision Makers

Interesting new report on Geoengineering:

www.wilsoncenter.org...

Again quite clearly shows that nothing is actual being field tested yet, let alone deployed.

Here's the conclusion:

The best future by far would be one in which geoengineering does not need to be done because greenhouse gas emissions are rapidly reduced by improvements in energy efficiency and new energy-supply technologies. But if the consensus among climate scientists is correct, the window of opportunity for reaching this future will not be open for long. If it closes, the next-best future may involve doing the same things, supplemented by the careful and time-limited use of geoengineering. Beyond these two possibilities, much worse
futures loom.

The benefits of pursuing these best futures are far greater than we usually assume. A large-scale mobilization to decarbonize our energy system would not only avoid dangerous climate change; it would also end our addiction to oil, protect the environment from oil spills and other environmental impacts, defend our national security, promote innovation, create jobs and assure U.S. competitiveness as energy technology becomes the next great global industry.

Even if geoengineering proves necessary, doing it responsibly while rapidly cutting our greenhouse emissions would be a large first step toward becoming a mature technological society in responsible control of its impacts and willing and able to take on growing responsibility for the welfare of future generations and the future of life on the Earth

I think that's the right approach. Research geoengineering, just in case. But focus on fixing the carbon problem first.

I agree

I remain very uneasy about geoengineering (cane toads, anyone?) but accept that we should still research various ideas to at least determine whether they might work and more importantly see what unintended consequence there could be.

Although I think we should concetrate on quicker and easier things that reducing carbon (which we're simply not going to do) - look at cutting soot etc first, which has massive health benefits as well. Get rid of the brown clouds. Stop deforestation and get forest regrowth going. Etc.

And for the deniers, chew on this a little.

www.youtube.com...

reply to post by Essan


Yes. The problem with carbon is that it's such an incredibly long term proposition to make any difference - and there's simply not the political willpower to make much headway.

We also need better models so we can more clearly demonstrate the case for one approach or the other. At the moment there's too much uncertainty - like with the sudden doubt raised over the white-roofs initiative.

Originally posted by MaxJohnson
And for the deniers, chew on this a little.

www.youtube.com...

edit on 15-11-2011 by MaxJohnson because: (no reason given)

What? That was debunked years ago, and has nothing to do with the topic.

contrailscience.com...

Originally posted by MaxJohnson
And for the deniers, chew on this a little.

www.youtube.com...

edit on 15-11-2011 by MaxJohnson because: (no reason given)

Wait a minute. This guy left his jar out there collecting rainwater for a month? How would you expect the alleged chemtrail signal to be separated from what would be caused by dust and other contamination over the period of a whole month?

Originally posted by Uncinus

I think that's the right approach. Research geoengineering, just in case. But focus on fixing the carbon problem first.

It won't get much traction on here tho - it doesn't presuppose that geo-engineering is already massively underway in secret.

My experience for "news" about Geo-eng and the like is that conspiracy believers response to this sort of info along het lines of "they wouldn't tell us anything at all unless it was already decided or in place" or something like that.

reply to post by Uncinus


OP: link says file is damaged. Please provide URL or search criteria. Thx.

reply to post by luxordelphi


Works for me - it is a 1.28mb pdf download.

Google search for "geoengineering for decision makers" - 2nd link goes to this page which has a pdf link at the bottom