Bonkers: IPCC's crazy geoengineering plans

Science fiction

There now follows a demonstration of the Law of Unintended Consequences. Start tinkering with a climate system you barely understand, and observe how it results in completely unforeseen responses, some of which could be seriously undesirable. But who cares? We have to save the planet, right?

Reflective aerosols would be sent into space under a series of radical “geo-engineering” measures being considered by the UN climate science body to tackle climate change, leaked documents disclose.

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) papers, leaked ahead of a key meeting in Peru next week, outline the series of techniques in which scientists hope will manipulate the world’s climate to reduce carbon emissions. [WTF? Geoengineering won’t reduce CO2 – it theoretically negates the theoretical effect of CO2 on the climate – Ed]

Among the ideas proposed by a group of 60 leading scientists from around the world, including Britain, include producing “lighter coloured” crops to reflect sunlight, blasting aerosol “mirrors” into the stratosphere and suppressing cirus clouds.

Other suggestions include spraying sea water into clouds as another reflection mechanism, depositing massive quantities of iron filings into the oceans, painting streets and roofs white and adding lime to oceans.

Experts suggested that the documents, leaked from inside the IPPC to The Guardian, show how the UN and other developed countries are “despairing” about reaching agreement by consensus at the global climate change talks. [Not despairing, just plain desperate – Ed]

But the newspaper reported that scientists admit that even if the ideas theoretically work, they could cause irreversible consequences.

Many of the scientists also accept there are major uncertainties surrounding the technologies.

As Watts Up With That? puts it: batshit crazy.

Read it here.


  1. Uhavitbad says:

    I heard that a small regional nuclear war would help mitigate global warming.
    Maybe your prime minister would like to use Iran as an example of a country spending tonnes of money fighting global warming.

  2. I’d be worried but when was the last time anything that the UN did was effective?

  3. This is much like Obama threatening to use the EPA to meet his emissions reductions if the Senate didn’t pass cap and trade. They’re threatening to geo-engineer if an agreement isn’t made in Durban.
    Noise and sparks, I don’t think there’s much to worry about here.

  4. I think this sums up the IPCC position:

    “You’ve made a mess in something we don’t completely understand, so now we’re planning to make another mess of which we’re not exactly sure what it will do, in order to solve the first mess”

  5. Baldrick says:

    Other projects being undertaken by the U.N. include … how to turn lead into gold, unearthing Atlantis, exploring Geocentricity, Phlogiston in the modern world and how Alchemy can reduce global warming.
    Adding lime to oceans! Painting streets white! Reflective aerosols! Spraying sea water into clouds! … get the picture?

  6. SOYLENT GREEN says:

    As I said back in 2009, when Assclown John Holdren suggested this, These imbeciles obviously never watched Our Man Flint.

  7. The Loaded Dog says:

    Other things you can do to help stop global warming are swinging a dead cat around your head at midnight in a graveyard and throwing salt over your shoulder.

  8. Clueless idiots at the top,
    Global Bullsh-t at its best, what next ?
    wheres all this Global Warming taking place then as there no evidence of it here in the UK
    what there is though Is Volcanic Ash Causing it to be cooler and Ash causing cloud seeding causing lots of Rain !!
    Oh but the Government cant TAX the Rain can they !!
    Wise up General Puplic

  9. The SA government had the idea of charging for water use when some farmers used rain-water filled dams on their properties. Not sure about the detail, but on the face of it…a rain tax…

    as for all the other geoengineering ideas, well, I am slightly cheered by the fact that they do say that there could be unforeseen consequences to their actions instead of rushing to build diabolical weather machines (flashbacks to a Kate Bush videoclip here). Sorry to turn nerdy, but I think Kim Stanley Robinsons trilogy about Mars covered both sides of the terraforming argument quite well.

    Just because we can model hideously complex climate systems doesn’t mean we understand how they work.

    • But we can’t model them – that’s the problem! Rough approximations at best, with huge gaps around several key climate factors such as clouds and precipitation. They are virtually worthless.

      • I agree. In retrospect, my wording does indicate that we can model global climate successfully, but that wasn’t my intention.

        I am impressed (on the ‘human achievement’ level perhaps) that we can get to even a “rough approximation” given the complexities, but it certainly isn’t something we should be using as a basis for economic decision making.

%d bloggers like this: