Certainly the risk of geogineering is potentially more catastrophic than anything else humans have done, including use of nuclear weapons (short of all out Armageddon). However we’re screwing up our response to climate change badly enough that we’re already heading there. That last desperate hope is starting to appear like our only hope, even among those who think they understand the risk.

5-10 years ago, I would have agreed: just say no to geoengineering. The risks are way too high. But we keep getting worse at climate change, not better. A lot of the technology we need to reduce output impact on the climate has been developed, is affordable and practical, yet there are still so many obstacles to building it out. As a tech guy I relish the challenge of figuring out a tech solution, but we have many partial solutions yet society won’t budge and I don’t know how to fix that. It’s so frustrating and hopeless.

It’s time to consider our last desperate hope. Time to try to figure out a way. Time for serious investigation, including pilots. We may never want to take that risk, but it’s starting to look like we’ll have to

[–] Corkyskog@sh.itjust.works 3 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Is it even possible to do effective geoengineering if the biggest countries aren't even on the same page?

[–] AA5B@lemmy.world 4 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (2 children)

Yes, and that is one of the huge problems with it. One developed country can do geoengineering that affects everyone, for better or worse. One developed country can decide to take the risk regardless of the rest of the world.

If my relatively well off country decides to spread some aerosol in the stratosphere to reduce incoming solar, for example, it can likely afford to make a difference in the rate of climate change. But just by calling it climate change, we’re recognizing it could affect everyone. Whatever I’m pumping into the stratosphere will not stay within my borders. If I’m able to change climate patterns in my country, those changes do not stop at the border

And of course a related issue is that any intentional change in climate systems will have different effects in different places. Even if you succeed, there will inevitably be those worse off. You can easily picture this turning into an out of control conflict. We all know about historical atrocities around resource exploitation of less developed countries, so what do you expect will happen if weather patterns are intentionally changed to benefit the climate of the wealthier countries at the expense of those who can’t afford it?

[–] dyathinkhesaurus@lemmy.world 3 points 5 months ago

Agreed. See the recent floods in Saudi Arabia due to cloud seeding for rain, for example. They've been doing it for years, but suddenly Everything Changed.

[–] str82L@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

At the risk of giving away spoilers, see Neal Stephenson's Termination Shock. A truly awesome read.

[–] AA5B@lemmy.world 2 points 5 months ago (1 children)

People keep saying that but the queue at my library is ridiculously long so I’ve never been able to read most of his books

[–] str82L@lemmy.world 2 points 5 months ago

Here's another library that might be able to help you: https://annas-archive.org/md5/e220f3cdd16f62f0ed8045af2530d11e