Geo-engineering not the answer to climate change

Even though former climate change skeptics, such as some American big businesses, want it to be the answer, geo-engineering our atmosphere is not the proper solution to climate change, even though it may well provide some relief.

First, it represents the typical American desire to find a quick fix for a not-so-quickly-caused problem, what I call “salvific technologism,” and should be viewed skeptically for that reason alone.

Second, note again people who are backing this idea. Former “skeptics” who may still be denialists-lite on climate change. If they’re still soft-pedaling the degree of the problem, they’re going to short-change the degree of solution offered.

Third, by analogy from bio-engineering, geo-engineering is likely to have all sorts of unexpected consequences. Any frequent hiker of deserts of the western United States is familiar with saltcedar (tamarisk), and with why saltcedar was imported here. That’s but the most glaring example of how are less-than-omnipotent vision has backfired on us in the past. It’s also why genetic engineering is not to be cavalierly trusted.

Fourth, let’s take a look at some of the “solutions” being offered.

Sulfur dioxide in the atmosphere? It works; particulate pollutants of various sorts have kept today’s level of global warming from being even worse. But, note that it’s called “particulate pollutants.” Note also there’s not guarantee it can’t “fall down” to lower levels of the atmosphere, where it would cause … acid rain. Scratch Crutzen’s idea; being a Nobel laureate, even in a closely related subject of award, is no guarantee of genius.

Sowing the oceans with iron dust? Sure, the plankton would grow, die and — presumably — sink. But, for how long would the extra carbon stay trapped? Our oceans are starting to have problems with increased acidification as we speak.

Creating massive mechanical shields and sending them aloft? The cost, not just in dollars, but carbon expended to create, erect and maintain them wasn’t mentioned.

Finally, don’t forget that many former denialists in the Big Biz world are probably seeking some PR-friendly greenwash, too.

With all of these, the American hunger for a “painless” technological quick fix is indeed priceless.