The notion that geoengineering disempowers those in developing countries is a very odd argument, IMO. How many times do we need to see analyses that say developing countries will be very seriously impacted by climate change before we're willing to say that they have such a huge incentive to see something done about this mess that it's insignificant who is paying for and doing the geoengineering? As I've said in presentations and on my blog, the symbol for climate change should not be a polar bear, but a map of Bangladesh (possibly with the to-be-lost coastal land highlighted in red?).
Of course there will be winner and losers. Corporations that build wind turbines, solar panels, batteries for EVs, etc. will have a dramatically brighter future than those that continue to operate with their heads in the sand. (Note the relative ranking; this is not an absolute assessment.) Sadly, corporations involved in disaster cleanup/rebuild will also see increased business... -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "geoengineering" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to geoengineering+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to geoengineering@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
