Comment on The $100tn path to net zero

• PostmodernPythia@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  Yes, if everything else fails. But continuing our current rate of consumption and assuming geoengineering will save us (which, let’s be real, is the intention of most geoengineering supporters) is insane. I don’t oppose developing the tech. I oppose using it until we’ve tried everything else.

  source

  • Hypx@kbin.social ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Then you are simply not aware of the situation. We have “tried everything else.” It has basically failed already. There is no chance we can stop emissions in the timeframe desired. Geoengineering is already the only possibility.

    source

    • PostmodernPythia@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      We haven’t tried shit. We’ve continued to operate as if there are no limits to the biosphere. I’m very aware of the situation, which is the only reason I don’t reject geoengineering out of hand. Mao thought ecoengineering by killing all the sparrows would increase crop yields. It did not end well. I simply don’t want that on a global scale.

      source

      • Hypx@kbin.social ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

        You're missing the part about time. There is nothing that can be done in time to stop the problem. We've already tried everything that could actually work in a short amount of time. Geoengineering is the only thing left.

        The rest of your argument is a strawman argument. There's nothing to defend there.

        source