Foreign Affairs on geo-engineering

I was a little surprised to see a cover article on geo-engineering appear in the March/April edition of Foreign Affairs. I was even more shocked to see ocean acidification* acknowledged, a frequent blind spot in many political discussions of geo-engineering. I was less surprised by the absence of realistic discussions of the full timescales (“over 100 years” is one hell of an understatement) a carbon pulse of all/most of our easily minable coal would span.

Reading the article, it’s difficult for me to imagine how geo-engineering would prove to be less of an international treaty/regulatory hassle than emissions reductions- especially while emissions reductions schemes in various forms already exist and the US plans to enact cap and trade during the current Presidential term.

Thoughts?

*There’s an upcoming documentary on the subject debuting next month: A Sea Change. It was inspired in part by the filmmaker’s reading of Elizabeth Kolbert’s 2006 piece in the New Yorker, The Darkening Sea.

One response to “Foreign Affairs on geo-engineering

  1. Yes, the regulatory and legal nightmare of international cooperation on geoengineering could never in a thousand years be less complicated than carbon taxes or emissions trading etc. Nor can I imagine the nations of the world geoengineering climate in an egalitarian manner.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s