• ameancow@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    The dangers of geoengineering cannot be overstated, and we have a good chance of dying from the results of deliberately fucking with the climate as we do from our centuries of inadvertent fucking with the climate.

    Not saying that we shouldn’t if we have no choice, but people need to understand that this is NOT a good option we’re left with and our species needs to really take notice how close we are to ending our time here due to lack of forethought or care.

    • Skyrmir@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      5 months ago

      Don’t worry, the political upheaval caused by mass migrations will be more than enough to put the brakes on any global attempt to save the climate.

      • ameancow@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        5 months ago

        Very likely.

        It will be really interesting from a Western perspective to see if the rest of the world, the part that actually makes up the bulk of the population of humanity, and the portion of the population who will be most impacted by climate change, take unilateral actions to geoengineer or design systems to alter the climate.

        I can’t picture the US and EU doing anything other than posturing and use the idea of manipulating nature as a political tool to promote or attack and make people scared so some asshole or another can claim power for a day. But nations like China and India who have the most at stake are fully capable of taking action without a unified alliance.

    • AA5B@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      5 months ago

      The dangers of geoengineering cannot be overstated

      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

        • AA5B@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          5 months ago

          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?