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.

Advertisements

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