Global Warming: Geoengineering is not politics
It’s an election year, and the heat is on. The US presidential election gets the world to pay attention, and somehow, informed people around the world have their pick, albeit they are not eligible to vote. The election is big, widely reported, and gets interesting.
There are two major sides in the election, when a side raises a point, the opponent counters. The election, like in ‘08 is coming amidst economic issues and, wobbling recovery; both sides have good stuffs, but this may never be admitted by the opponent. Politics is found in other areas of business, aside from democratic government setup, but it is limited or missing in a few areas.
Science research, for example, has not been about sides, where discovery is made by one side and another side’s sole work is to invalidate it. What normally follows is improvement. Developments in science and technology won’t be where it is, if it was politically styled, but there are examples of modern-day politics in some aspects of science and research, backed by sides and interests.
An example is global warming, an aspect of climate science that defines upward shifts in the average temperature of the earth due to anthropogenic activities. It is said to be responsible for climate change, or deviations in usual weather conditions around the world. Global warming is an issue canopied with the divide of believing or not-believing.
There are researches that are there to show that global warming is a lie, there are articles, books, events and the no-action to curb emissions responsible for it. There are, on the contrary, efforts for global warming. We see presently in global warming, real, clear, politics, with offensive, defensive play.
Politicizing global warming is bad for climate science, and bad for progress. It has crept into a related area, climate engineering (or geoengineering). Geoengineering is the deliberate large scale manipulation of an environment process that affects the earth’s climate, in an attempt to counteract anthropogenic global warming.
‘No one’ absolutely supports geoengineering but there are ‘many’ against it. Scientists and policy folks working on geoengineering continue to refer to disadvantages around the subject, even when they present its possibilities; but there are those who take the disadvantages and make it a call.
These folks are opponents and the former are somewhat proponents. Geoengineering ‘politics’ is wonderful. Where proponents talk about the techniques, its good and unknowns; sincerely saying mitigation is better, and other stuffs that lists the techniques as risky. Â
Opponents allude geoengineering disadvantages, presenting it like proponents do not talk about it; denigrating the subject in ways that present proponents as serving their interests, for a co-owned planet. Opponents to geoengineering also have claims on stuffs about the subject they believe is ongoing.
Nobody wants geoengineering, and this is the truth. Scientists proposed it as a quick-fix solution if the earth’s climate is about a tipping point, while action on mitigation catches up. Scientists, with all the evidence cannot control World Leaders to collectively mitigate emissions -- effectively. World Leaders on the other hand, cannot control mitigation-dependent situations like current economic woes -- fast enough, and adoption of renewables -- extensively.
Geoengineering came off this understanding. It is, at this time not certain for large-scale deployment, and has a long way to that destination, if it ever will. Geoengineering is now like politics, because there is an opposition; but scientists and policy folks want to avoid an exchange.
Responding to every claim, will stain the subject; but it is now necessary to make moves on the defensive, that will be indirect, but will save efforts on geoengineering from being misinterpreted; since the opposition will continue to bash the subject and those working on it. Their clear information and evidence will coax more people against the subject, than scientist’s academic-styled reports.
Geoengineering is being researched, and it is a broad term. Real geoengineering (or climate engineering) work is limited to certain countries, but related activities classified as geoengineering ‘is taken’ for deployments in other regions including the States, Europe and Australia.
Geoengineering is not politics and will not be politics, because scientists understand the risks. It is however advisable to start developing geoengineering presentably for the public, where the media will not solely have the power for reports, and technical-terms will not discourage interests. More meetings in ‘new’ countries, interactive and updated sets of websites, research regulations and clear objectives will save the subject from one-sided zeal -- politicizing geoengineering.
Tags: Geoengineering , Politics , Climate Engineering , Climate Change , Global Warming ,
No comments:
Post a Comment