[jaggs]

Actually the technology is NOT good. https://archive.vn/AgLi8

"The scariest thing about this proposition is that models suggest that many of the people who could well be most harmed by these technologies are already disproportionately vulnerable to the impacts of climate change. Imagine this: North America decides to send sulfur into the stratosphere to reduce the intensity of the sun, in the hopes of saving its corn crops — despite the real possibility of triggering droughts in Asia and Africa. In short, geoengineering would give us (or some of us) the power to exile huge swaths of humanity to sacrifice zones with a virtual flip of the switch."

[neffy]

The other rather dangerous assumption is that arrogant Californians are the only ones who will try to do this.

The problem is Geoengineering is not a zero sum game - if India decided to try and engineer the next ice age for example, to get access to the shallower parts of the Indian Ocean.

[jaggs]

This is exactly one of the major problems. What happens if a free for all is triggered? Do we get carrier group diplomacy standoffs in various regions to stop nations doing their own bit of engineering? Does the UN step in? So what if it does? It's a nightmare scenario if this stuff takes off.

[gavanwilhite]

I’d like to politely point out that you are speaking to the geopolitical coordination challenges related to deployment, not the technology itself.

Those are real, important issues to be worked through, and to your point, and they are better served by a multi-stakeholder approach that values climate justice.

There is research and work needed both on policy and the technology aspects of this.