PDA

View Full Version : Geoengineering


Patriсk
July 29th, 2011, 11:50 AM
Geoengineering is the deliberate manipulation of Earth's environment and climate using technology. In recent times, it has become a possible solution for mitigating climate change, particularly global warming, which is increasingly becoming a major and serious issue of concern around the world. The debate as to whether implementing this concept is right or wrong continues with many considering it a taboo subject and unethical while others seem to advocate the idea. However, those ideas remain hypothetical or at most in planning stages with no real implementations till this date.

A further read which I found interesting: http://www.nzherald.co.nz/gwynne-dyer/news/article.cfm?a_id=153&objectid=10733241&ref=rss

What is your stance concerning this topic? Do you think this temporary solution is needed or it is just too risky to implement?

G.U.Y.
July 29th, 2011, 11:54 AM
o3o What an interesting topic!

Personally, I am not against geoengineering. I mean, if it stops any climate change which will be harmful to our civilization as a whole I don't see what's wrong with it.

Controlling the climate (that doesn't mean controlling the weather) would be extremely helpful. We could even turn deserts into farm land. o3o

Guy
July 29th, 2011, 12:15 PM
Controlling the climate (that doesn't mean controlling the weather) would be extremely helpful. We could even turn deserts into farm land. o3o
Note that it would only be decreasing the temperature by a couple of degrees as far as I understand by reading what was said in the article and in the comments below. I doubt it would allow us to convert deserts into farmlands.

...at least not yet.

As for where I stand on this matter, I find it sort of risky. I mean, we're going to be messing with just more than temperature. There's going to be a lot more involved just to succeed to that point of reach. Basically, we'd be interfering with the way nature operates on a global level. I'd much rather try and save the planet in more resourceful ways if we can. I mean, while I agree we have to do something before we end up like Venus, I'd prefer we go about it more naturally than trying to seize something that just wasn't meant to be in human control.

dinosaurodon
July 29th, 2011, 12:42 PM
We already messed with the temperature, if we could revert earth's climate back to the way it was 500 years ago wouldn't that be a good thing?

Gumball Watterson
July 29th, 2011, 01:00 PM
I thought Geoengineering had to do with rocks o__o I need to do more reading.

I'm for the manipulation of climate, though. Sure, we'll screw up a few ecosystems, but it'll all turn out good in the long run.

Kyoko
July 29th, 2011, 01:22 PM
I'm really not a big fan of this :/ I think nature flows the way it needs to and goes through certain cycles and by messing with that there's the possibility of ruining so many ecosystems and endangering even more animals then there already are. We're already in a mass extinction, I don't think we need to keep that going.

Plus, there's always that horrible chance of people using it the wrong way. I watched a show on "weather warfare" where the military would try manipulating the weather to cause droughts or hurricanes, or whatever. Not saying that would happen, but hey, you never know.

I think it's risky to try and alter something that can cause such damage.

donavannj
July 29th, 2011, 01:27 PM
We already messed with the temperature, if we could revert earth's climate back to the way it was 500 years ago wouldn't that be a good thing?

I don't think such a drastic change would be a good thing. If we utilize this counter-method, it should be done gradually, and only as a supplementary thing to longer term solutions.

Myles
July 29th, 2011, 01:37 PM
We're going to need to do geoengineering in order to not kill off half the species of the planet. Even if we dropped all human-produced greenhouse gas emissions right now, the temperature will continue to rise (http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/02/110215150845.htm) if we don't intervene.

Esper
July 29th, 2011, 01:48 PM
As long as long term steps are put into place to keep future damage to the environment to an absolute minimum then I'm okay with it. This is assuming it's not some attempt to put a tropical jungle in the middle of the desert and divert whole rivers, leaving other areas barren. If what we loose in the change is offset by a greater gain then there's not much of a problem as I see it. Like, if you look at the Netherlands where they've reclaimed a ton of land from the sea there isn't too much of a downside to that and they've gotten a lot more space for humans to live.