We don’t want to alarm people, but this is something you should know:
Attached are excerpts from the Committee on Science and Technology, U.S. House of Representatives:
“Geoengineering: Assessing the Implications of Large-scale Climate Intervention” 2009
Key points:
“Geoengineering can be described as the deliberate large-scale modification of the earth’s climate systems for the purpose of counteracting climate change.”
Geoengineering is a not conspiracy despite multi-controlled establishment entities characterizing anyone who questions this climate engineering as conspiracists.
There are two main types of geoengineering that are considered viable: solar radiation management: particles released in the stratosphere and whitening clouds over the oceans, and carbon removal through capture and storage of carbon (industrial capture and spreading minerals over the earth).
“Geoengineering carries with it a tremendous range of uncertainties, ethical, and political concerns and the potential for catastrophic environmental effects.”
Uncertainties include the ability of geoengineering to prevent climate change.
Ethical concerns entails the release heavy metals and chemicals in the atmosphere (iron seeding or aerosol injections), which end up food and water systems, and blocking the sun’s rays.
Political concerns include geoengineering being used militarily against another country or groups of people.
Catastrophic effects include alteration of the chemical composition of the atmosphere to the detriment of life, and contamination of life from mass release of chemicals and heavy metals (iron seeding or aerosol injections).
In 2017, the UN Climate Change Committee says geoengineering “risky”, but should be explored:
“Due to the great uncertainties over effectiveness and side effects of climate engineering – including the risk of disrupting natural systems – experts think that there is a need to discuss climate engineering governance, especially as it relates to stratospheric aerosol injection.
Stratospheric aerosol injection consists of injecting sulfate aerosols into the stratosphere with aircraft or balloons to create a global dimming effect.
“This technology is absolutely terrifying. We may actually need it, but then, who do we want to decide. That’s where this society-wide discussion has to take place,” said Janos Pasztor, Executive Director of the Carnegie Climate Geoengineering Governance Initiative (C2G2), and former UN senior climate advisor.””
In 2019, the U.S. government blocked the UN from reporting on geoengineering: solar radiation management and carbon capture.
As of 2022 the World Economic Forum has taken a cautious approach:
“This lack of understanding is quite a risk, since it remains unknown what might happen if the world pursues strategies like stratospheric aerosol injection, let alone if a specific country or organization decides to pursue these interventions by itself.
In our view, research into the potential consequences of stratospheric aerosol injection should include studies to examine potential changes in crop yields, shifts in global rainfall patterns or changes in critical regions of the Earth’s biosphere, like the Amazon rainforest. The fact is that we don’t know very well what would happen with stratospheric aerosol injection – which is why research on this topic is so critical.”
Currently, states and organizations are acting on their own when it comes to geoengineering with no public oversight.
Obviously, at NCA we are deeply concerned at geoengineering and the lack of transparency.
For Canadian citizens to support NCA, donate today:
For international supporters, become a NCA international member:
17
50000
1k
20
