Geoengineering: People vs. Planet?

A new method of potentially earth-saving technology has come about, but its consequences may outweigh its benefits. Geoengineering is the process of changing the earth’s climate in order to counteract global warming. Scientists have adapted this idea and a large part of their evidence has come from the Mt. Pinatubo eruption in 1991.

This massive eruption in the Philippines released 20 million tons of Sulfur Dioxide into the atmosphere. These particles of Sulfur reflected the suns rays back into space and lowered the earth’s average temperature by half a degree. Scientists are looking to utilize the same earth-cooling process without erupting any more volcanoes.

One plan to use Geoengineering was introduced to the U.N. Convention on Biological Diversity. This plan entails releasing sulfur dioxide into the stratosphere in order to cool the earth’s temperature. In addition to its effective results, this process would also be very cheap.

On the other side of the argument, some people are worried about the affects that these changes could have on our life. Is global cooling worth the potential for drastic rain changes that could cause massive issues in areas of the world that depend on constant rainfall? As of now, Geoengineering is halted until the scientific research has been concluded and regulations have been set up.

One thought on “Geoengineering: People vs. Planet?

  1. Zoe Anderson

    This was one of the four environmental heresies that Steward Brand discussed! I personally am not convinced. The sulfur dioxide cap and trade system was one of the biggest environmental success stories of the last few decades (see http://www.edf.org/page.cfm?tagID=1085 )Why would we go back on all the progress we have made in reducing emissions and preventing acid rain (which is hugely detrimental to ecosystems) as well as pollution (which has harmful effects on human respiratory systems)??? Could the geoengineering process be contained somehow to minimize the harmful effects? I know we are in a dire situation right now, but this seems like a one-step forward two-steps back kind of solution. How can we know what kind of additional problems geoengineering could create? Admittedly, it needs to be considered, but I think it should definitely serve as a “last resort”.

Leave a Reply