SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Any attempts to engineer the climate are likely to result in "different" climate change, rather than its elimination, new results suggest. Prof Ken Caldeira, of Stanford University, presented research at a major conference on the climate risks and impacts of geoengineering. These techniques have been hailed by some as a quick fix for climate change.
But the impacts of geoengineering on oceans, the water cycle and land environments are hotly debated. They have been discussed at a meeting this week of 12,000 scientists in Vienna. Researchers are familiar with the global cooling effects of volcanic eruptions, seen both historically and even back into the deep past of the rock record. With this in mind, some here at the European Geosciences Union General Assembly ( http://www.egu2015.eu ) have been discussing the possible worldwide consequences of pumping sulphate aerosols into the stratosphere to attempt to reflect sunlight back into space and cool the planet.
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 18 2015, @03:11PM
> But what if so-called "Climate Change" isn't caused by humans? What if it's part of the natural cycle?
Irrelevant. If climate change is happening we are fucked regardless of the root cause.
> Hell, what if "Climate Change" doesn't actually exist, and is only a figment of measurements made during an irrelevantly small period of time?
That's redundant to your first point about "part of the natural cycle." The evidence that something is happening is incontrovertible. The opening of the northwest passage, the enormous amounts of glacial melt in greenland and antarctica. All these things are happening and are not just minor perturbations.
> Should we still be engaging in such climoengineering?
Depends on the specific types of engineering. It isn't an either/or, it is a range of options with long-term and short-term effects.