Lou,
your point about the 'retail activist' problem relates to a recent thread
about whether discussing geoengineering made focus groups more willing to
believe in climate change. Portraying the situation as hopeless induces
brain freeze, as in 'this is too depressing to think about'. But
Poster's note : short extract below discussing geoengineering. Full
interview is very good. It basically describes why I left the green
movement - they're all out of ideas and they have no solutions left. I
don't agree with her conclusions, however - especially on geoengineering.
Naomi Klein is wrong.
I do not see any substantial subset of people researching geoengineering
who see it as a way to avoid doing the hard work of reducing emissions.
For most, researching 'geoengineering' is an expression of despair at the
fact that others are unwilling to do the hard work of
All the points Andrew made below about geo-engineering were made in recent
years about adaptation (some called it immoral to even talk of adaptation).
The reality, of course, is that the epic, multi-generational path from a
fossil-fueled civilization to whatever comes next is implicitly an
: geoengineering@googlegroups.com [mailto:geoengineering@googlegroups.com]
On Behalf Of Andrew Lockley
Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2013 2:28 AM
To: geoengineering
Subject: [geo] Naomi Klein: Green groups may be more damaging than climate
change deniers - Salon.com
Poster's note : short extract below
Klein never said that it was the researchers avoiding the hard work. And
in that, I agree with her completely. Politicians, heads of large
corporations and other concentrations of power are nearly all playing a
game of kick the can down the street. Eventually we'll reach a point
where
Ken Caldeira writes, plausibly, that: for most, researching
'geoengineering' is an expression of despair at the fact that others are
unwilling to do the hard work of reducing emissions. NPR aired an
interview with David Keith a month ago: Keith spoke of something else: *
we're* *hiding a
Hi Andy:
Naomi Klein had a few interesting points, but Joe Romm certainly brought the
discussion to a much deeper level. With regard to geoengineering, Naomi Klein
made the same error displayed by many who have not run the numbers. It is not a
matter of geoengineering to avoid reducing
