Geoengineering Governance - what will it look like

Pehaps all those people passionatly against the mythical chemtrails could turn their energies to what MIGHT happen in the future - I refer of course to Geoengineering in the atmoshphere.

I say "in the atmosphere" because there are already various geoengineering projects around that do not directly involve the atmsophere - although they may affect it - eg carbon capture, cool roofs and the like. (wiki page on geoengineering)

some organisations are concerned that under the current legal climate there is nothing to stop any individual or country from unilaterally doing what it likes, so some organisations want to have "a discussion" about governance issues - eg:

EDF SRM: solutions.edf.org...
SRMGI: www.srmgi.org...
Oxford geoengineering
Geoengineering Governance Research
Congressional Research Service
Stanford University

Geoengineering is technically feasible - I do not think there is any doubt about that.

So how should it be regulated?

first thing to do is get rid of these ...

weather derivatives

reply to post by tinhattribunal


You think that restricting people's freedom to gamble is a reasonable tradeoff?

Originally posted by tinhattribunal
first thing to do is get rid of these ...

weather derivatives

Why would you? The government does things to regulate the financial market, it does things that affect the financial market. And yet there are financial derivatives of all kinds. So why would regulating or performing geoengineering require no weather derivatives? If people though the game was rigged then they would not play.

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul
reply to post by tinhattribunal

 

You think that restricting people's freedom to gamble is a reasonable tradeoff?

i feel that modifying the weather would be used to restrict people's freedom's.

for instance, a particlar event in town say , an airshow, would be cancelled due to modified bad weather , paying off handsomely if properly 'insured' , thru deriviatives.
on the other side of said town , participants in a 10k 'rain or shine' run find themselves in a life threatening situation , competing in rain , hail ,and lightning.

in that situation 'the people' generally will 'lose' to those making money off bad weather.

overall, i would think weather modification programs would work better if wall street was not involved.

reply to post by tinhattribunal


I think Geoengineering probably cannot be that specific - it will affect entire climates at at least a continental level - not just local weather.

And if a link can be made betrween any local weather modification (such as upweather cloud seeding for example) and insurance payouts then insurance companies will be looking hard at claiming back any payouts they make!

A governance control that might address your point and is relevant to the governance issue might be public announcements of all programmes for example - that might make it easier to link them to consequences.

reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul

A governance control that might address your point and is relevant to the governance issue might be public announcements of all programmes for example - that might make it easier to link them to consequences.

yah! a very precise level of control would be required if the public was fully informed of the operation and it's capabilities.
if drought was ended in Africa but China gets totally flooded ... there would be a lot of explaining to do!

and wouldn't everyone want nice weekend weather ?
if the people in control could promise that to some extent, they should get a lot of support.

how about a worldwide white christmas

Originally posted by tinhattribunal
reply to post by Aloysius the Gaul

 

how about a worldwide white christmas

I live in the Southern Hemisphere - we like our beach BBQ's at Xmas thanks very much!!

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul
reply to post by tinhattribunal

 

I think Geoengineering probably cannot be that specific - it will affect entire climates at at least a continental level - not just local weather.

And if a link can be made betrween any local weather modification (such as upweather cloud seeding for example) and insurance payouts then insurance companies will be looking hard at claiming back any payouts they make!

A governance control that might address your point and is relevant to the governance issue might be public announcements of all programmes for example - that might make it easier to link them to consequences.

edit on 17-12-2012 by Aloysius the Gaul because: (no reason given)

"I think that they can do Geo Engineering quite specifically" "I think it is quite probable"

Just thought I would put a twist on your words because this is a no link post replying to a no link post.

Regards, Iwinder
staying tuned for a good knock around thread.

reply to post by Iwinder


careful !
now you're goin' into HAARP territory ...
that's sure to bring out Phage.

Originally posted by Iwinder

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul
reply to post by tinhattribunal

 

I think Geoengineering probably cannot be that specific - it will affect entire climates at at least a continental level - not just local weather.

"I think that they can do Geo Engineering quite specifically" "I think it is quite probable"

Just thought I would put a twist on your words because this is a no link post replying to a no link post.

so you are deliberately misquoting me and admitting to it?

How peculiar....

reply to post by tinhattribunal

I respect Phage and his wisdom, bring him on!.....LOL

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul

Originally posted by Iwinder

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul
reply to post by tinhattribunal

 

I think Geoengineering probably cannot be that specific - it will affect entire climates at at least a continental level - not just local weather.

"I think that they can do Geo Engineering quite specifically" "I think it is quite probable"

Just thought I would put a twist on your words because this is a no link post replying to a no link post.

so you are deliberately misquoting me and admitting to it?

How peculiar....

I did not mean to actually quote you, sorry about that I really meant to take your words and change them to my opinion and not your opinion.

I did add this to the post "Just thought I would put a twist on your words because this is a no link post replying to a no link post.
I apologize for any misunderstanding however I feel you knew what I meant by my post.

Regards, Iwinder

isn't it against T&C
to be promoting your modus vivendi

or posting unpaid advertising/phishing for bucks?


from gaul to gauche

LL

P.S
nice to see you reacting to and reposting links, Spiral0ut, myself, and deadeyedick www.abovetopsecret.com... have already kindly provided though you're putting your own spin on it

PPS you forgot the video

Originally posted by tinhattribunal
reply to post by Iwinder

 

careful !
now you're goin' into HAARP territory ...
that's sure to bring out Phage.

lol phages alright, just needs to hang with a better crowd

Originally posted by DerepentLEstranger

nice to see you reacting to and reposting links, Spiral0ut, myself, and deadeyedick www.abovetopsecret.com... have already kindly provided

though you're putting your own spin on it

2 of the links were posted recently - the others AFAIK have not been seen on here before that I am aware.

as for spin - I posted what is the obvious content of all of those sites - they require no "spin" to be part of a discussion on geoengineering governance, since they all mention it quite explicitly.

PPS you forgot the video

Ah - so that is where you copied your links from.

appart from the links (many of which appear OT to the video itself!!), it is irrelevant and OT to issues of governance - if you want to discuss it then I suggest that another thread would be the best place for that - probably in the schience forum

reply to post by DerepentLEstranger

nice to see you reacting to and reposting links, Spiral0ut, myself, and deadeyedick www.abovetopsecret.com... have already kindly provided though you're putting your own spin on it

And what is the problem with that?

You should feel priviledged that he used it, and used it the way it should be...

There is no problem with him re-posting my links. But there is a problem with denying that geo-engineering doesn't already exist. And as the above poster pointed out with weather derivative trade in the billions, why would anyone ever want to manipulate temperatures via geo-engineering tactics?

Of course, they would most certainly tell us about this, and ask our permission, before doing so, right??!! Even if there were potential health hazards, and billions of dollars to secretly profit, right?

reply to post by Spiral0ut


Who denies that geoengineering exists??