Are you f'ing KIDDING me?!
This is rediculous; look at this article
This is rediculous:
AP Newsbreak: Obama looks at climate engineering
By SETH BORENSTEIN
AP Science Writer
The president's new science adviser said Wednesday that global warming is so dire, the Obama administration is discussing radical technologies to cool Earth's air.
John Holdren told The Associated Press in his first interview since being confirmed last month that the idea of geoengineering the climate is being discussed. One such extreme option includes shooting pollution particles into the upper atmosphere to reflect the sun's rays. Holdren said such an experimental measure would only be used as a last resort.
"It's got to be looked at," he said. "We don't have the luxury of taking any approach off the table."
Holdren outlined several "tipping points" involving global warming that could be fast approaching. Once such milestones are reached, such as complete loss of summer sea ice in the Arctic, it increases chances of "really intolerable consequences," he said.
Twice in a half-hour interview, Holdren compared global warming to being "in a car with bad brakes driving toward a cliff in the fog."
At first, Holdren characterized the potential need to technologically tinker with the climate as just his personal view. However, he went on to say he has raised it in administration discussions.
Holdren, a 65-year-old physicist, is far from alone in taking geoengineering more seriously. The National Academy of Science is making climate tinkering the subject of its first workshop in its new multidiscipline climate challenges program. The British parliament has also discussed the idea.
The American Meteorological Society is crafting a policy statement on geoengineering that says "it is prudent to consider geoengineering's potential, to understand its limits and to avoid rash deployment."
Last week, Princeton scientist Robert Socolow told the National Academy that geoengineering should be an available option in case climate worsens dramatically.
But Holdren noted that shooting particles into the air - making an artificial volcano as one Nobel laureate has suggested - could have grave side effects and would not completely solve all the problems from soaring greenhouse gas emissions. So such actions could not be taken lightly, he said.
Still, "we might get desperate enough to want to use it," he added.Another geoengineering option he mentioned was the use of so-called artificial trees to suck carbon dioxide - the chief human-caused greenhouse gas - out of the air and store it. At first that seemed prohibitively expensive, but a re-examination of the approach shows it might be less costly, he said.
Shooting pollution into the air? To solve the climate crisis?! What about the then-resulting pollution crisis? This global warming is claimed to be from air pollution and carbon dioxide, and your sollution is to vomit MORE garbage into the air?! And what happens if it works, and the global warming is stopped.... you now have an Ozone full of garbage that you CAN'T GET RID OF and will continue to do it's job and turn the planet into a giant block of ice over the course of time. And what about health impacts? Cancer rates, species extinction, effects on the ocean, messing with the oxygen we need to breathe? Any of that cross your minds? No, apparently not. Let's throw that theory that a massive eruption of particles into the air caused the dinosaurs to go extinct right out the window, because then we can throw the effects of "an artificial volcano" into the atmousphere. Ignoring the massive death toll and environmental effects that actual volcanos cause.
Here's an idea.... plant trees. Preserve the natual environment. Actually implement the technology you are sitting on that allows cars to run without fuel. Of course, that would put the gas companies out of commission and therefore cut a lot of federal pocket money, so that will never work. Seriously, they HAVE THE TECH and they won't release it because of the impact it would have on oil companies. Maybe incentives with car companies that are struggling, making the tech affordable to people to purchase cars that run on no oil? Instead of throwing bailout money around trying to save floundering industries, put it to use on tech that would stave off environmental impact WITHOUT belching more pollution into the air, since you're convinced pollution is what started it? Oh, no, that would make SENSE. and that's not what the government is about. Seriously... this is why I don't fucking vote. Because it doesn't matter. They are all fucking meatheads that are bought off with money from big companies. Asshats.