[mudlus]

Yeah, it's really a shame that geo-engineering projects keep getting shut down. We either control the climate, or it kills people. It's that simple. Without controlling the climate you don't get to pick and choose who lives and who dies because of "nature". It's not even a coordination problem. It's a regulation problem. People don't all need to agree before progress can happen and errors can be corrected. We just need any organization to show some backbone and stop kowtowing to the suicidal environmentalists.

https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2024/3/20/harvard-geoengi...

[mrtesthah]

"Suicidal environmentalists"? What kind of preposterous position is that?

There is no known CO2 removal or capture technology currently capable of reducing levels faster and with less energy inputs than simply shutting down the current emitters.

Geo-engineering is essential, but stopping emissions is even more so.

[angiosperm]

More to the point, geo-engineering is guaranteed to fail if emissions are unchecked. Whatever gains the former can offer, the latter may easily overwhelm. Our only hope is for emitting processes to become much more expensive than non-emitting alternatives. Fortunately we are on that path, although entrenched interests force emitting processes to continue well beyond economic rationality. E.g., new coal burning infrastructure being built even now.

[generic92034]

I wish, but I am not so sure we are really on the path, when I read articles like this one:

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2024/mar/28/oil-and-...

Quote: "World’s fossil-fuel producers on track to nearly quadruple output from newly approved projects by decade’s end, report finds."