'"Geoengineering is not a public good but could be a giant international scandal with devastating consequences on the poor," said Diana Bronson, a researcher with the ETC Group, an international non-governmental organization.'
What is ETC's answer to the devastating consequences to the poor if by other means we fail to mitigate climate change and ocean acidification? What are those other means, aren't they currently failing, and what is ETC offering as a better strategy? If one is concerned about the poor and the planet it would seem dangerous to prematurely reject any potential mitigation option until proven unsafe/unuseful. So what is ETC's real motivation, agenda, and clientele? -Greg E&E News Climatewire Leaked geoengineering plans draw ire from opponents (06/16/2011) Scientists concerned about global warming are considering turning to some radical solutions they hope will allow them to geoengineer the Earth's climate, according to documents leaked from the United Nations. Potential plans include painting streets and roofs white, planting lighter-colored crops and shooting droplets of seawater into clouds, all in an attempt to reflect sunlight away from the Earth. Other plans include placing massive iron filing deposits in the world's oceans and suppressing cirrus clouds. The leaked papers outline plans that a group of 60 scientists are planning to discuss and assess next week at the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in Lima, Peru. Far from being 100 percent confident in their plans, the scientists expressed concerns that they could have unforeseen and potentially permanent consequences. A group of 125 environmental, human rights and development groups sent a letter to IPCC head Rajenda Pachauri, outlining complaints that the IPCC had no authority to be considering geoengineering. A larger concern surrounding the IPCC meeting centers on who or what would regulate geoengineering. "[Geoengineering] is not a scientific question, it is a political one. International peasant organizations, indigenous peoples and social movements have all expressed outright opposition to such measures as a false solution to the climate crisis," said the letter. Nations like the United States and Great Britain have supported geoengineering research with millions of dollars in research funding. That enthusiasm is not shared globally, though, and Catherine Redgwell, a professor of international law at University College London, asserted: "A multilateral geoengineering treaty is not likely or desirable. The appetite for climate change law-making is low." Without regulation, geoengineering opponents fear that technologies like the ones outlined in the leaked papers could be pushed forward recklessly and without oversight. "Geoengineering is not a public good but could be a giant international scandal with devastating consequences on the poor," said Diana Bronson, a researcher with the ETC Group, an international non-governmental organization (John Vidal, London Guardian, June 15). -- LN -- 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.
