At least Klein understands that types like Caldeira and Keith are clear when they explain that geoengineering is not an alternative to emission reduction. Her reasoning now seems a step ahead of where she was when she argued that the ocean she looks at from the window of her Pacific Northwest home is no longer the same because 100 tonnes of iron was dumped into it by Russ George.
Her argument that only a radically transformed capitalism can solve the climate problem dribbles away as she asserts that what's needed is the application of a few trillion dollars. Congress committed to spending on this scale while establishing the beacon of democracy that is today's Iraq, and it did so while reducing taxation. On Thursday, September 18, 2014 4:22:21 PM UTC-7, andrewjlockley wrote: > > Poster's note : irksome interview which falls into lazy intellectual traps > (solar power vs geoengineering, monsoon disruption risk). Maybe a lesson > for scientists, in that "idealised experiments" clearly have the potential > to enter folklore as policy-relevant ideas, even among leading > environmental thinkers. > > http://m.democracynow.org/web_exclusives/2256 > > -- 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 [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
