Comments on: Is geoengineering inevitable?

By: Kapt. Knucklehead

Kapt. Knucklehead — Fri, 17 Jun 2011 06:46:23 +0000

In the fabrique of space and time there is no insignificant grain of sand or action that results influence throughout this reality of the human universe.How can we believe we can manipulate nature when our understanding of its weave and fiber is so less than thorough and primitive that we are surprised and confounded by our own meager advancements as a civilization.Until we can build the loom our attempt to operate it is irresponsible unless we are the first or the only sentient life form to evolve.Its not the planet that’s at stake here but the survivability of the biological inhabitants.In my opinion any solution motivated for monetary or weaponized advantage is not worth the risk to our fragile balance with life on the Little Blue Marble.If you f–k with Mother Nature be sure she enjoys being pregnant!

By: Marie-Therese

Marie-Therese — Fri, 25 Mar 2011 14:25:35 +0000

You might like to know that, whilst geo-engineering is debated in magazines, blogs, etc., it is already being done on a vast scale. Generally it is pushed aside as the so-called “chemtrails vs. contrails-debate”.
I live in Oxfordshire, England and on at least two days in 2011 we had planes flying up and down the sky on a sunny morning, creating a layer of artificial clouds. Sprayings have been observed elsewhere in England and in Europe. Many people testify to that all over the internet; satellite pictures are available, suggesting systematic spraying patterns rather than the effects of regular air travel and transport.
The chemicals proposed to be sprayed and already being sprayed into the atmosphere have serious health-implications both for humans and wildlife. In California, for example, the level of aluminium on some mountain glaciers is up to 60,000 times higher than recommended. The origin of this can only be precipitation, which has been affected since sprayings began around 7 years ago. Aluminium, for example, is one major factor in the massive rise of Alzheimer’s disease. Forests are already dying on a large scale, exacerbating the problem of CO2 and thus climate change itself.The acidification of rainwater, soil and freshwater caused by sulphur compounds is a threat to all aspects of the biosphere, but – more importantly – agriculture and therefore human life as such. If geo-engineering was to go ahead as it is being proposed here and, as evidence suggests, is already happening, this would be a crime against humanity beyond all precedents.
The only way to stop climate change and the rise of global temperatures is to reduce carbon- and other emissions. If this fails, we will have to live with the effects of it and try to mitigate the problems as much as possible. It is not the task of scientists to avert a supposed apocalypse; it is the task of politicians to coordinate the regulation of emissions and help those seriously affected.

By: Steve Brant

Steve Brant — Tue, 09 Feb 2010 16:01:11 +0000

I agree completely that we must remind people that climate change is a serious problem, especially in light of the climate change deniers who continue in their efforts to “prove” they are right (using all the marketing tricks at their disposal).

One reason I speak about aspirational motivation and related macro-cultural dynamics is that – when you bring the “whole system of our culture” into the conversation – you can talk about how collaborative relations between all nations can lead to significant reductions in military spending. And that’s important because we’re going to have to get the initial money to change our industrial model from some place.

But this means talking about issues of us being One Human Family…. a family that needs to learn how to settle its differences without killing each other. And climate change experts aren’t exactly organized around talking war vs. peace. But, in my humble opinion, they need to be. Or at a minimum they need to partner with people who can.

Everything’s related. That’s what Russ Ackoff, W. Edwards Deming, and Peter Drucker tried to get the world to see.

Thanks for reporting on this very interesting workshop… and this dialogue, even if it seems to be a bit off topic. I used to be a civil engineer, so I’m actually fascinated by what these people are talking about doing.

By: Marc

Marc — Tue, 09 Feb 2010 15:25:36 +0000

Thanks, Steve. I don’t disagree.

In this post, I was reporting on a science workshop on geoengineering. Nothing aspirational or inspiring there (except in the sense that very thoughtful people are wrestling with a real and serious problem).

I agree that it would be better to inspire people with a vision of a more sustainable world. That’s why I like to write about electric cars and solar panels as well as DC policy and energy efficiency. As my friend Joel Makower often says, we have to make green products “better”–either better for you, or more stylish, or lower cost, or easier to use.

But it also helps, I think, to remind people that climate change is a serious problem that demands our attention.

By: Steve Brant

Steve Brant — Tue, 09 Feb 2010 15:19:47 +0000

Mark,
Here’s my Big Idea: It’s time we stopped using Fear-based Motivation in our attempts to end the threat of global warming.
What? But we’re going to die if we don’t stop it!
Yeah.. but how many people do you know who keep on smoking cigarettes, even though they know it’s bad for them? It’s a behavioral addiction problem. And we’re just not going to get the people who control the world into the kind of “group therapy” it would take to break them of this addiction.
We need to shift from trying to “stop bad behavior” to trying to “start good, new behavior”… because that puts the power of creating change back in the hands of the consumers.
Oh… get people to buy more green products?
No… get people to transform the larger culture in which our current industrial model exists.
How we treat Mother Nature is a sub-set of how our culture functions across the board.
The Social Systems Sciences (aka Systems Thinking aka Design Thinking) teach that the solution to a problem is to address the design of the larger system in which the problem exists.
How humanity relates to Mother Nature is a subset of a scarcity-based, zero-sum world view.
How do you shift a culture’s world view? By inspiring them to make the shift by teaching them the positive future they can have if they go through the trouble of doing so (“trouble” including “unlearning” things that are no longer true).
This is Aspirational (not Fear)-based Motivation. And it’s part of what I’m writing about in the book I’m working on. (BTW, William McDonough comes from this “don’t stop bad stuff; start good new stuff” place.)
I’d be happy to talk to you or any of your other readers about this…
Steve