While the amount of scientific and governance - related information about climate engineering has been steadily increasing, there remains a lack of public and policy - relevant
information on climate engineering.
Significant
research on climate engineering, including, for some technologies, outdoor experimentation, is already occurring, and climate engineering pathways are already being considered seriously by scientists and policymakers.
There is scope to systematically investigate the effects of image
framing on climate engineering concepts; however, this was not the purpose of our work.
Some observers quietly worry that, under Trump, a new
focus on climate engineering could become part of a justification for delaying government action to curb carbon emissions, with the reasoning that geoengineering technologies could later be used to remove carbon from the atmosphere, or prevent the warming effects of solar radiation.
The Forum for Climate Engineering Assessment works with and advises environmental
NGOs on climate engineering, without advocating for any particular policy agenda for or against research into these technologies.
The following exchange is prompted by an
article on climate engineering that appeared on the front page of the print edition of the New York Times on November 10, 2014.
As an attorney, officer of the court, citizen of this nation, and steward of this planet, I have a fiduciary duty to shine a
light on the climate engineering programs occurring virtually every day over California and across the country.
The organizations that have responded so far, like Friends of the Earth and the National Resource Defense Council, largely have previously - stated
positions on climate engineering.
When I ask fellow college students for their
views on climate engineering, I'm met with blank stares — even from Environmental Science majors, by and large.
We are beginning this work by bringing our working group into conversation with some of the chief architects of prior SRM governance - focused processes, along with some of the leading academics working
on climate engineering science, ethics, policy, and law.
Reaching a critical mass of public
awareness on the climate engineering issue is absolutely critical if we ever are going to have any realistic chance for ending this climate engineering nightmare once and for all.
One additional example of documents already located is an ICAS report to the executive office of the
president on climate engineering from 1966, it can be found HERE.
The climate science community is (and has been) completely betraying populations and the web of life by remaining
silent on the climate engineering / weather warfare total tyranny being conducted by our own government (and other governments).
The strongly contrasting objects, attributes, and likely behavioral consequences of SRM compared to CDR were the reason the National Academies of Science decided to publish two separate
reports on climate engineering.
I will continue to challenge
them on climate engineering, however frustrating.
In sum, they have made themselves the «go to guys»
on climate engineering.
Presently, Dr. Reynolds's primary focus is
on climate engineering.