Just weeks after Hurricane Sandy ravaged the east coast, climate change was on the forefront of everyone’s mind at Techonomy 2012 in Tucson, Ariz. In a session about geo-engineering, Harvard physics professor David Keith, Harvard Kennedy School research fellow Andrew Parker, and Rolling Stone‘s Jeff Goodell talked about the realistic possibility of reflecting sunlight away from the planet to lower the earth’s temperature—and, more pressing, the complicated political implications of this climate change quick-fix.
There are obvious consequences, both environmental and political. First, the only way to have a stable climate in the long run is to cease all emissions. “You could go on forever, and walk further and further along the plank,” said Keith. “You keep walking yourself further away from the current climate, and something is going to break catastrophically.”
But most terrifying are the political ramifications. There are no international laws regulating geo-engineering, so any nation could start emitting sulfur into the atmosphere. The nations most likely to adopt the sulfur technique are those who most keenly suffer from climate change-related events. The result? Weather warfare.
Consider, for example, what could happen if China decides launch a geo-engineering campaign, Parker suggested to the audience. Soon after, India suffers an extreme weather event. No one would be able to tell if the natural disaster was caused by the geo-engineering or prior climate conditions, fingers would be pointed – and conflict could ensue.
“Imagine two frat boys fighting in their apartment about where to set the thermostat,” said Keith. “I think we urgently need to build up some type of rule.”
Click here for a complete video archive of Techonomy 2012.
View editorial post