Global warming is likely avoidable using geoengineering technology. But, for some reason, many don’t think a technological solution is morally appropriate. For

Global warming is likely avoidable using geoengineering technology. But, for some reason, many don’t think a technological solution is morally appropriate. For instance, here is a concerted effort trying to permanently ban all scientific research on geoengineering [1]. Sure, no one wants to loft sulfur dioxide into the upper atmosphere, but it won’t cost much [2] and we have plenty of natural experiments demonstrating safety (volcanoes). The critical thing is that it would buy time to transition. It’s not like there isn’t a massive interest in transitioning from fossil fuels. But, will we transition fast enough to prevent irreversible runaway positive feedback loops? [1] interestingly, the rationale for banning solar geoengineering is not the potential danger of the technology, but the (claimed) inability to govern the process. https://www.solargeoeng.org/ https://www.solargeoeng.org/ Alternatively, here is a view from the Editor of Science, calling for “Symmetric Precaution.” https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.abm8462 https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.abm8462 [2] https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/aae98d/meta https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/aae98d/...