Comments on: When Will Geoengineering “Tip”?

By: James Merickel

James Merickel — Wed, 06 Jan 2010 08:36:31 +0000

The main idea is to assume we will have to use geoengineering and then to pick the best model. To me, it’s already certain: Use a clean(est) alternative energy source for pulling the carbon back close to where it was in the fist place. All other thoughts have serious limitations. This one might be economically more expensive, but what does it really mean to be economical anyway? Net things out including the externalities and what you get is obvious. If people would only get this right!!!

By: Alden Moffatt

Alden Moffatt — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 16:13:48 +0000

Geoengineering is already, obviously by looking at satellite photos, begun. It is probable that jet fuel is already being distributed with aluminum oxide additive on a large scale. Hughes has a patent on the process from 1990 so there should be a money trail about where it is being used and how much.

By: Alfredo Louro

Alfredo Louro — Fri, 10 Apr 2009 04:21:38 +0000

Willingly polluting the atmosphere can’t be good. This is the application of the same idea that led to bailing out the banks and other corporations that created the current economic crisis, effectively rewarding them for their incompetence and their bordering on criminal greed. Geoengineering lets the oil industry and other high carbon emitters off the hook, passing the burden of the consequences on to future generations. No wonder the American Enterprise Institute is applauding the initiative.

By: ion

ion — Sun, 29 Mar 2009 20:19:51 +0000

Atmospheric geoingineering = CHEMTRAILS all around the world

By: Michael F. Sarabia

Michael F. Sarabia — Thu, 26 Mar 2009 03:05:59 +0000

We have some data: A meteor put 100 Billion tons of sulphur in the air which led a long “Nuclear Winter” and killed the Dinosaur.

“A 6-mile-wide asteroid, named “Chicxulub”, impacted 65 million years ago with an energy of 300 million Megatons and left a U-shaped crater, 110 to 185-mile wide, in the north coast of the Yucatán Peninsula, centered on the town of Chicxulub and includes Mérida, the capital.
The crater is buried by limestone one kilometer thick but the contour is very clear in radar pictures from Endeavor Shuttle [Scientific American: Earth from Sky, Dec-94]. The composition of impact glass bead tektites in Yucatan matches glass bead tektites found in Haiti.

The impact created a fire storm and hurled trillions of tons of dust plunging the Earth into a dark winter with temperatures down tens of degrees. Physicist Luis Alvarez said over 100 Billion Tons of Sulfur were hurled to the upper Atmosphere where droplets reflected sun rays and the earth froze in four years -sulfuric rains killed dinosaurs and most other animals and plants -but not the shark or the cockroach. Volcanoes often send sulphur to the air.

By: Christopher Mims

Christopher Mims — Sat, 21 Mar 2009 18:36:55 +0000

I’d be more cautious about saying things like “it’s likely to be cheap, and to work.” If you’re going to expound on this, you owe it to yourself to read up on Joe Romm’s thoughts on geoengineering:

Memo to DARPA, Pentagon: Stay out of geoengineering — aka climate manipulation!
http://climateprogress.org/2009/03/16/darpa-pentagon-military-geoengineering/

By: Patrick McCray

Patrick McCray — Fri, 20 Mar 2009 20:14:52 +0000

Chris-

Interesting piece…suggest you check out Jim Fleming (Colby College) who has written a few very interesting pieces on the history of plans to do ‘planetary engineering.’ Best,

Patrick

By: Dane Wigington

Dane Wigington — Thu, 19 Mar 2009 17:26:28 +0000

Atmospheric geoingineering is the elephant in the room. Since when did our government ask permission to do anything? Our skies here in Northern California are regularly saturated with what we can only assume are “jet particulate trail”. Grid patterns, X’s, and at times dozens of parallel lines creating a dirty white haze that covers the sky.
Citizens in all North State counties are taking rain water heavy metal tests at a state certified lab. There are massive quantities of heavy metal in all of nearly 4 dozen tests so far in our region alone. Aluminum, for example, has had a 50,000 percent increase in only three years. No, this is not a misprint. The most recent test was 3450 ppb for aluminum. Anyone that knows anything about this metal knows this amount is a highly toxic level, to say nothing of the ongoing accumulation in our soils and rivers.Simular reports are showing up across the country and from Europe. Primary patents on ‘geoingineering’ list aluminum oxide as the first component of ‘proposed’ sprayed aerosols from aircraft. Multiple agencies in our area, including the USDA, are studying a recent and rapidly accelerating die off of flora, fish, and amphibians. Resparitory and neurolugical disorders are also sky rocketing. Numerous and recent studies make clear how deadly ‘bioavailable’ aluminum is to life forms. In addition, the ’solar obscuration’ caused by atmospheric geoingineering exponentially reduces solar power potential. On top of all this, there is the disruption of weather patterns that are a direct result of excessive aerosols in the atmosphere. (numerous studies from mainstream science institutions are also available on this issue).
Atmospheric geoingineering is does appear a proposal, but an ongoing and very lethal reality.

By: Philip H.

Philip H. — Thu, 19 Mar 2009 13:16:12 +0000

Although it is a year old, my discussion here on iron fertilization of the oceans is still germaine. I'm not at liberty to go into all the details, but I can tell you that MANY government scientists are seriously discussing the consequences of geoengineering the oceans to capture carbon. Given that adding CO2 to the water will make it more acid, and possibly cause local to regional scale Harmful Algal Blooms, hypoxia, and even complete overturning of phytoplankton communities, many of us in the ocean fields are VERY leery of this approach. Skeptical may even be an appropriate word. Which is why I worry when a science reporter I know and respect starts saying that geoengineering might be a good idea.