sehric

Hi Kumi! Thanks for all your great work, with Greenpeace and before. I want to ask you, with the increased attention being paid to geoengineering techs (specifically research programs into Solar Radiation Management) at universities (Oxford, Harvard, Yale, Johns Hopkins) and gov agencies in the US, Canada, Europe and China, and the funding coming from folks like Gates Foundation, Exxonmobil, etc, and even inclusion in the new IPCC AR5 draft (chapter on aerosols), isnt it time that civil society engage the public on this? A concern is that the conversation remains directed by those with particular perspectives (technocrats who tend to see only technological 'solutions' as relevant) and motivations? Shouldn't GP and others be responsible to its members and the public to help foster a conversation on technological responses to climate, and the implications for climate justice? So far you've not engaged, worried either about the moral hazard argument. But the science is moving, and the conversation is happening without you. thanks for doing an AMA! cheers

Hi, thanks for this answer. Is the distraction aspect the reason GP is not engaging the conversation? I assumed your thoughts on the above, my question was more about engaging the conversation to make this point. Policy folks in the US are going ahead having the conversation about these techs talking to themselves, biz, and science labs, but w/o engagement from civil society. So the convo is moving ahead about the desirability of using such techs, and about the feasibility, but not about the why, and with no one questioning whether or not we really want to go down this road. No one questioning the philosophy of the decisions. I think to your question on the likelihood of a gov being brave enough to act because techs emerge, the answer is, post 'incident' or 'catastrophe,' the answer is likely. I hope GP will develop a thoughtful policy on this that explains why it is a distraction, and why bc it is, we should choose to not engage it, and in fact keep govs and biz from engaging it. At the moment, with all due respect, you are ignoring a conversation that is happening without you, and will matter whether you engage it or not.