Geoengineering refers to the deliberate large-scale intervention in the Earth's climate system to counteract climate change, such as by reflecting sunlight, increasing precipitation, or removing CO2 from the atmosphere. Proponents argue that geoengineering could provide innovative solutions to global warming. Opponents argue that it is risky, unproven, and could have unforeseen negative consequences.
Narrow down which types of responses you would like to see.
Narrow down the conversation to these participants:
Political party:
@ISIDEWITH12mos12MO
Yes
@9N9CHQZ11mos11MO
The currents complaints about the climate are centered around the unintended consequences of using fossil-fuel throughout the history of mankind and especially so within the last melania. I do not want to try to think of the unintended consequences of trying to directly manipulate our world on a mass level. Even if successful in the short term it could have long-term consequences. Why would I want to temp catastrophe from a different source.
Before any mass expeditions in to this field extensive strenuous testing needs to be done. It needs to be heavily regulated do that some company does not… Read more
@SablevargGreen 11mos11MO
Yes, but these should be carefully vetted to limit potential negative effects and used in conjunction with an green energy - not a replacement for green energy.
@9MJTP4G12mos12MO
Yes, but with caution and careful consideration of potential risks and benefits.
@ISIDEWITH8mos8MO
How would you react if your favorite natural landscape was altered by a scientific solution meant to stabilize the climate?
@9YFWM9D6mos6MO
I'd be fine with that. A more stable climate allows for a more stable world. Prevents necessary governmental aid for recovering from natural disasters, etc.
@9TP6VG98mos8MO
If it helped the environment, I would be sad, but at the same time, I would be happy
@9YFWDQYRepublican6mos6MO
If it was being done to stabilize the climate, I am all for it. Climate change needs to be stabilized.
@9YFSM5C6mos6MO
As long as there are no draw backs and it can preserve the landscape for a long period of time, I don't see the problem with using science on my favorite landscapes.
Yes, but major research and tests need to be conducted to affirm that we are moving in the right direction, and not furthering our current climate change concerns.
@ChaseOliver 12mos12MO
The best way to combat climate change is by reducing taxes and artificial barriers to entry so that incentives for innovation allow the market to provide solutions,
@Patriot-#1776Constitution11mos11MO
Climate change is a hoax.
@9V7DV4B7mos7MO
We should research it but it needs to be heavily careful and experimental to see if it is even safe for our climate
@9ZKPQXZ6mos6MO
Not yet. Instead, fund the research to see the other unintended consequences to the environment that they could pose. If the downsides are little-to-none, then pursue it further.
@9L4Z23BIndependent 12mos12MO
Yes, the Department of Interior should engage in P3's to research geoengineering and other ways to combat climate change
@B56CVZQ1wk1W
No, i think our government needs to actually work on other things to combat climare change first because nothing significant has been done so far
@B54JYWP1wk1W
Yes, geoengineering is highly risky, but it is likely to be a necessary part of our approach to avoiding the worst effects of climate change. Funding research will be critical to doing it as safely as possible.
@B4VPGV22wks2W
Yes, but the government should also be looking into ways to combat climate change by drastically reducing our carbon footprint
@B4SGJD3Constitution3wks3W
Yes, but not for climate change. It should be fully embraced if they can be used for military purposes, like new bioweapons.
@B4MZLGG4wks4W
Yes, the Government should fund research into geoengineering and other methods of combating climate change to better the world and hopefully fix as much of the damage we caused as possible.
@B4KLCSB4wks4W
decrease our reliance on cars, build more mixed used cities, and reduce waste, and find efficient and ways to power our lifestyle are more important
@B4GL4ZH 1mo1MO
Yes, the better sources and things we have to heal our planet the better. We only have one, after all.
@B4FNL7M1mo1MO
cautious approach; while research might be warranted to understand the possibilities and risks, it should not detract from the primary focus on reducing emissions and should be approached with extreme caution due to potential unintended consequences
@B4DLJTQ1mo1MO
subjective and depends on individual perspective regarding environmental policy and climate change strategies
@B4D6KHP1mo1MO
No, for the sake of capitalism, federalism, weak government, checks and balances, low taxes, low national debt, and climate change does not exist.
@B4CSJFP1mo1MO
Yes, the government fund research into geoengineering as a way to combat climate change because it will slower the process of the climate of the Earth changing drastically.
@9FZPSHS 1mo1MO
No, unless far more research and risk analysis is conducted to prevent potentially catastrophic effects
@B4BK4TW1mo1MO
This should be researched and tested in a controlled environment such as a facility as Biosphere 2, where we can see the impacts on the environment before attempting it on the earth itself.
@B476LQ22mos2MO
Yes, as long as it's in conjunction with funding allocated to renewable energy infrastructure and research
@B43X7DC2mos2MO
Support geoengineering as a way to combat climate change but I don't think it should be government funded research as of right now.
@B42KFGT2mos2MO
No, not yet. Focus on climate change mitigation first. If issues get out of hand then more experimental and drastic methods may apply.
@B3ZYM5D2mos2MO
No, climate change is a hoax and is not real; plus, we also have to focus on lowering taxes for everyone regardless of class, stopping reckless, socialist spending, and deflating the national debt
@B3ZMW4J2mos2MO
Yes, research is fine, but the people deserve to have a say in whether large-scale implementation goes forward
@B3VHKSP2mos2MO
I believe that we should fix our economy focus on the issues that are impacting Americans this country right now and focus on that when our current situation is better and we have the funds to target other issues.
@9L4Z23BIndependent 2mos2MO
Yes, the government should engage in research for geoengineering and other ways to combat climate change
Not a lot of funding should go into this as it has shown to be mostly ineffective and would be a waste of money.
@B2LWRQNIndependence3mos3MO
Yes, in order to get rid of fracking and replace it only to reduce environmental impact and climate change
@B2KW47V 3mos3MO
No. The government should use market-based policies to incentivise solutions to combat climate change, but it should not directly fund research into geoengineering.
@B2HDPPX4mos4MO
There needs to be funding for research not action - as there is no statement that this might not cause a worsening of climate change
@B2H63PX4mos4MO
Not yet. We are NOT ready. Wait until a bunch of millionaires go to space or down to see the Titanic and come back unharmed.
@B293WGR4mos4MO
Yes, fund research into geoengineering, however keep in mind that as the world turns, our climate will change, season to season, decade to decade, and that we cannot STOP change, but we can become more prepared to deal with the changes that will come.
@B27DQXM4mos4MO
yes I believe in carbon capture technology but I don't believe in putting aerosols in the atmosphere or bioengineering organisms to combat climate change
@B265DP95mos5MO
I don't think we have enough information to decide if this would be a good thing or something harmful to our environment. More research on the possible consequences is necessary. Focusing on removing fossil fuels and leaning more into green energy is still our best bet.
@92YHQCV 5mos5MO
Test it first, and if it has no unforeseen negative consequences, then begin researching into geoengineering as a way to combat climate change, but at the hint of unforeseen negative consequences coming into play, then geoengineering is to be shutdown
Research / do computer modelling to assess impact, problems, uses. Do NOT use geoengineering, period.
@9ZX28KS5mos5MO
No, fund development of responsible energy solutions and eliminate reliance on cars to combat climate change
@9ZWRCQX5mos5MO
I don't like geo engineering, but knowing the US governments short-term profit-seeking economy and short-sided politics, we might actually need to do it.
@9ZWPK8BRepublican 5mos5MO
Yes, we need to actively combat climate change to the best of our abilities and knowledge, but we also need to frequently review the effects of our actions to ensure that our actions are helping rather than hurting.
@9ZV8Y9R5mos5MO
No, I am concerned about the potential consequences of geoengineering. The government should invest in cleaner energy alternatives and eliminate dependency on cars to combat climate change
@9ZTG2WR5mos5MO
No, we should fund cleaner energy alternatives and eliminate car dependency to combat climate change
@9ZRH46C6mos6MO
it should be tested and used at the same time to try to combat climate change, but if it is proven wrong we should stop it
@9ZNGK9D6mos6MO
There needs to be much more research and testing done before this should even be considered as a possibility.
@9ZM54QK6mos6MO
I agree with idea of geoengineering, but its practices are relatively unknown and can have potentially dangerous repercussions
@9ZKRJLRRepublican6mos6MO
The government should fund research, no actions should be taken until the research is proven to have no negative consequences.
@9ZKP6WT6mos6MO
No, we need to focus on reducing emissions now, rather than hope geoengineering will provide a solution in the far future.
@9ZGGPDD6mos6MO
Yes, but only if we caused too much climate change before we made out society more environmentally friendly
@9WV5D427mos7MO
Geoengineering is a broad category with many different types of programs, some of which are much better than others. This question is too vague to answer yes or no to.
@9WTNFQ77mos7MO
No, they already are doing geoengineering that has changed our weather, climate and killed people. The gov't needs to stay out of trying to change the weather.
@9WSH4X77mos7MO
Yes but it need to have government surveillance if the government or military general can approve it.
@9WQHMY57mos7MO
No, crack down on current factors which increase carbon emission such as big corporations. More research needs to be done on effects of geoengineering
I'm on the fence on this one because it's not the government's job to fix climate change but it would be nice for them to help combat climate change
@9WP2B7N7mos7MO
No, we should work within the climate we have because the earth does most of these jobs for us anyways.
@9WN5JB97mos7MO
Research yes but actually doing it no. At least not until there is enough research to make sure it’s safe to do
@9WMX4947mos7MO
Put more research into geoengineering first to see how it can combat climate change and on what measure.
Yes, but only in tandem with changes in policy and standards to protect the already existing environment.
@54GWHT8 7mos7MO
The government should continually fund climate change research and scientific study, but not specifically large-scale geoengineering projects.
@9W7RKVD7mos7MO
Yes, but only relocate the funds from current damaging energy sources and areas damaging the climate.
@9W4PT9YPeace and Freedom7mos7MO
yes; but only if it's partnered with an active federal regulatory decrease of emissions with a goal of zero, rather than continuing to allow emissions.
@9W45FB47mos7MO
I think they should have some funding but not be are biggest concern if there are other things happening in the world
@9VXBYT6Libertarian7mos7MO
No, It destroys our natural weather systems and poisons our air and water. Besides, t has for many years already, it's not a secret anymore.
@9VV7RV47mos7MO
No, they should put funds into restoring the environment to naturally reduce climate change since artificiality fixing could result in even worse conditions.
@9VT6LB57mos7MO
Test it for a short period of time and research what results you received. Then wait a while to see if any negative effects occurred.
@9VNCK7N7mos7MO
Yes, but only a little. Experiments may be done, but it's best not to become over reliant on geoengineering so that companies don't take advantage of the extra time to use fossil fuels.
@9VMCV9T7mos7MO
I personally don't think climate change is a big problem right now but if it becomes a bigger issue in the future I think it would be reasonable.
@9V5NB3P7mos7MO
Geoengineering should be a last-case scenario and very thoroughly researched. Before anything else, the government should work on ways to reduce contributing issues to climate change.
@9V4TMXK8mos8MO
The government should focus on the issues of climate change and how we have an impact on it rather than trying to control it without fixing anything that we do.
@9V3VWSX8mos8MO
I think it should be researched but not implemented until further research and knowledge is obtained
@9TX98YS8mos8MO
No, the government should subsidize any alternative energy production and allow consumer demand to drive corporate interests.
@9TWXDRY8mos8MO
Research, yes. But more funding into the actions we know we can take now like wind, solar, and stopping fossil fuels!
@9TVT67P8mos8MO
Desinstrialization is the way to combat climate change, not geoengineering. This is unproven and potentially dangerous. Human hubris!
@9TRL3BM8mos8MO
I think the government should fund research not as a way to combat climate change but to limit the symptoms until the main problem can be addressed.
@9THGXFL8mos8MO
only with survivability in crops like corn or potatoes. actually potatoes don't need it. they're already strong enough
No let that be private or public institutions or organizations or companies but to make sure safer practices are being followed and an independent oversight is called for
@9TFRWGM8mos8MO
Yes, but it should progress slowly and steadily as we continue to research it and weigh the risks. More funding should go to research before implementation and we should be risk averse.
@9TCVM2Z8mos8MO
No, they should address the root causes as a permanent solution, not the symptoms as a temporary solution.
@9TC9NT58mos8MO
No, i believe climate change is natural in the coarse of earth and its gonna get hot no matter what we do.
@B3HQLYW2mos2MO
Yes, but only with excessive oversight from leading experts, federal government officials, local government officials, and civilians located in the area where the work will be completed.
@B3H5CYG2mos2MO
climate change is something that happens natrually and we shouldn't even be focused on that and should focus on other more serious things like the economic state of the world
@B36QFF63mos3MO
no, fund research on how to decrease our carbon footprint and finding the perfect balance to keep from going to either extreme
@B34HB8P3mos3MO
if the people of the community of earth agree that their respective governerning bodies should combat climate change then yes I do not see an issue.
@B2Z4DDK3mos3MO
Geoengineering, while an effective method, is extreme. We may hit the point at which it seems reasonable, but we have not yet.
@B2VF3MK 3mos3MO
No, we should pursue other solutions to the climate crisis, such as phasing out fossil fuels and adopting nuclear energy
@B2SBL9X3mos3MO
No we should focus on reducing our carbon emissions. Geoengineering can lead to more negative impacts than good ones
@B2S7M4D3mos3MO
no climate change isnt real its a natural thing the earth is trying to figure out. as the sun gets bigger the planets are going to get hotter its just a natural thing
@B2S6MWK3mos3MO
No, there needs to be more research about the benefits and possible consequences. We should focus time and money on green energy instead.
@9ZXWBN75mos5MO
No, fund development into renewable energy sources and eliminate reliance on personal vehicles to combat climate change
@9ZBLV9R 6mos6MO
Yes, but also fund research to understand how conserving existing resources and reducing harmful practices could combat climate change.
@9YTZPVY6mos6MO
I want more evidence and solid predictions of what the long term effects could be of trying to interfere.
@9YNNR5S6mos6MO
The government should fund research into chem trails and storm seeding and put an end to them and other harmful geoengineering/chemical deposits that drastically change the climate.
Loading the political themes of users that engaged with this discussion
Loading data...
Join in on more popular conversations.
