"A few months ago, Marjorie Taylor Greene, then a Georgia representative, held a hearing on her bill to ban research on geoengineering, which refers to technological climate interventions, such as using reflective particles to reflect away sunlight. The hearing represented something of a first a Republican raising alarm bells about human activity altering the health of the planet. Of course, for centuries, people have burned fossil fuels to power and feed society, emitting greenhouse gases that now overheat the planet."
"On the right, Greene is not alone: anti-vaxxers and chemtrail conspiracy theorists are pushing to criminalize research across states and on Capitol Hill. On the left, some argue it's a moral hazard even to acknowledge we might need tools beyond mitigation. But two inconvenient truths should force us to reject geoengineering research bans and reappraise climate strategy. First, the Earth's climate system appears more sensitive to greenhouse gases than once hoped. Second, we are not reducing those gases nearly fast enough."
A congressional hearing proposed banning geoengineering research, framing technological interventions like injecting reflective particles as controversial. Political opposition spans the right (conspiracy-driven criminalization efforts) and the left (moral-hazard concerns about acknowledging non-mitigation tools). Two empirical realities demand continued research: higher-than-expected climate sensitivity to greenhouse gases and insufficiently rapid emissions reductions. Rising risks of catastrophic impacts and feedback loops increase urgency. Research into deliberate cooling interventions and other tools is necessary to complement mitigation and prepare for scenarios where emissions cuts lag. Mitigation and clean-energy transitions remain essential alongside accelerated research and honest planning.
Read at www.theguardian.com
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]