Earth Equity News

Geo-Engineering Shouldn't Be an All or Nothing Proposition. Commentary by Thomas Homer-Dixon and David Keith, NYTimes, September 19, 2008. "Navigating the worst [case scenario of melting polar ice caps] could involve what scientists call geo-engineering -- the intentional modification of the earth's climate. Unfortunately, although specialist circles and blogs are alive with heated conversations about geo-engineering, the idea is so taboo that governments have provided virtually no research money. Most of these conversations focus on the idea of injecting sulfate particles into the stratosphere to screen out the sun's radiation, as happens when volcanoes erupt... Of course, flooding the atmosphere with man-made particles poses real risks. So to reduce the uncertainty surrounding geo-engineering, research should include real-world tests of various technologies that poke the climate system just a little... The important thing is to get scientists, environmentalists and global-warming skeptics alike out of the nonsensical all-or-nothing dichotomy that characterizes much current thinking about geo-engineering -- that we either do it full scale, or we don't do it at all. While we should all hope that we never need to play God with the earth's climate, we must also have the best science at hand to do what might be necessary if melting polar ice leads to a far more dangerous future." Thomas Homer-Dixon is a professor of global systems at the Balsillie School of International Affairs in Waterloo, Canada. David Keith is the director of the Energy and Environmental Systems Group at the University of Calgary.