> "Geoengineering raises huge ethical and political questions, nationally and internationally." This is true though. We have some treaties[1][2], but not enoug

> "Geoengineering raises huge ethical and political questions, nationally and internationally." This is true though. We have some treaties[1][2], but not enough, and it still needs to be thought through. What happens if, say, country A is being badly affected by climate change, and they have the means to pump tonnes of SO2 into the atmosphere? They think it'd help with global warming, but country B doesn't and think it could make the climate worse? Who gets to decide? Do A and B then go to war over this? No disagreement at all that the research should be done, but it raises huge ethical and political questions, and there's nothing wrong with acknowledging that. When it comes to technologies that could change an entire planet's climate, opposition as the default position seems entirely reasonable. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_Modification_Convention https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_Modification_Con... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convention_on_Biological_Diversity https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convention_on_Biological_Diver...