Display:
No, but we don't know enough to get climate change right either: I'm comfortable with the idea that pumping loads of crap likely to increase the energy of the system into the atmosphere is probably a really, really bad idea but I could be wrong. Maybe it's all that's kept us out of a sudden ice age. I'm certainly not comfortable with the idea that any of our climate predictions are likely to be long-term accurate.

I'd like to see geoengineering limited to stuff we can reverse - like big reflectors in space to reduce the energy of the sun reaching the surface, so that we can undo what we did, but we won't be able to predict the outcome at all without putting a lot of money and effort into climate and systems science.

by Colman (colman at eurotrib.com) on Tue Sep 22nd, 2009 at 06:06:36 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I agree with what you say about climate change, but the possible or probable inaccuracy of climate models is part of the argument against geoengineering, it seems to me.

Reversible geoengineering is an idea, but it does depend on your conclusion: a lot of money and effort into climate and systems science. And hope.

by afew (afew(a in a circle)eurotrib_dot_com) on Tue Sep 22nd, 2009 at 07:39:29 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Seeding oceans or releasing aerosols scare the hell out of me.
by Colman (colman at eurotrib.com) on Tue Sep 22nd, 2009 at 07:43:29 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:
Login
. Make a new account
. Reset password
Occasional Series