.png)
 |
| Word map of words used frequently throughout my posts (Word Clouds). |
Unfortunately, it has been impossible to cover all the techniques listed in the initial second and third posts and I have not been able to dedicate a post to moral debates, but this article explores this. I can now understand why it is difficult to reach global agreements and set genuine targets, and many considerations must be made.
Finally, lay-persons should not feel disconnected from climate change discussions, though easy to do so. By adopting an active approach to this issue, we could collectively make a huge impact on GHG emissions and aid in meeting targets. By making a small change in your lifestyle.
Geoengineering should not be viewed as a last-ditch attempt to addressing climate change, an aggressive reduction in GHG emissions should be "Plan A", and failing to do so may leave us with no "Plan B". All geoengineering techniques are unproven to work in real-life. But, if they can be used responsibly with moral decisions considered, perhaps we can engineer our own climate and Friedrich Nietzche will be correct:
Geoengineering should not be viewed as a last-ditch attempt to addressing climate change, an aggressive reduction in GHG emissions should be "Plan A", and failing to do so may leave us with no "Plan B". All geoengineering techniques are unproven to work in real-life. But, if they can be used responsibly with moral decisions considered, perhaps we can engineer our own climate and Friedrich Nietzche will be correct:
"The time is coming when the struggle for dominion over the earth will be carried on. It will be carried on in the name of fundamental philosophical doctrines"
.
.
Farewell for now. I have enjoyed this experience and hope you've learnt something new. Check out the other blogs on the sidebar to learn more about your changing environment.
Nice final post! Do you think that we can realistically achieve the Paris Agreement targets without using SRM?
ReplyDeleteI would like to say no. But, I have conflicting views about SRM. I find these approaches to be much more risky and contentious than CDR but as I've mentioned in previous posts regarding SRM. I do see a place for them, especially if we ever need to rapidly cool the planet. But that's only if, the technology and knowledge behind it stands on its own accord, and if we can globally agree on SRM deployment that is fair and safe for the majority of the world's population. Then yes, I think SRM is needed for reaching Paris Agreements, but obviously this does not tackle the cause of warming, so we cannot rely on this being the solution but it can help ensure nations meet their pledges.
Delete