The EPA Air press feed from this morning included this tidbit.  You
are all now officially sci-fi.  You may now take down your diplomas
and pick up your fasers.

d.

7. GEOENGINEERING: Sci-fi solutions gain support as bureaucracy stalls
political efforts (12/16/2008)
http://www.eenews.net/climatewire/2008/12/16/7/

As political efforts to tackle climate change become bogged down in
bureaucracies, schemes for saving the Earth's climate system that were
once dismissed as crazy or dangerous are now gaining status.

Among the geoengineering schemes being tossed around is scattering
masses of sulfur dioxide particles in the stratosphere to reflect
sunlight and lower the temperature by a degree or two. A more
ambitious idea is to set up an array of deflecting lenses between
Earth and the sun to reduce the solar heat striking the planet.

The so-called geoengineering proposals have been dismissed by
mainstream science as distractions or crackpot ideas that run the risk
of further damaging the biosphere and that could cost many times more
than reducing the heat-trapping pollution from fossil fuels that
causes the problem. But as the problem grows deeper and political
schemes to cut emissions become watered down or take years to
implement, geoengineering has begun to shed its untouchable status.

Jim Thomas of Canada-based watchdog group ETC said one reason for the
switch is the "level of panic" surrounding greenhouse gas levels,
which are growing at about 3 percent per year. Another reason, he
suggested, is the "astonishing switch" by former climate skeptics and
conservative lobby groups in the United States. After years of denial
or contestation, these powerful forces have suddenly accepted global
warming as a problem and see geoengineering as an alternative to
slapping costly curbs on big polluters.

But the scientific community is far from endorsing geoengineering. In
fact, the United Nations' Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change in
an assessment report last year cautioned against the potential risk
and cost of such schemes.

"There is a danger that the more these things get talked about, the
more people assume that there is some inherent legitimacy with the
proposals that are being put forward. That simply is not the case,"
said David Santillo, a senior scientist with the Greenpeace Research
Laboratories at the University of Exeter (Richard Ingham, AFP/France
24, Dec. 7). -- KJH



--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"geoengineering" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to