http://www.ETCgroup.org for resources on the governance of science and news from around the world. !!!
This action story was taken from our-planet-is-not-your-experiment The opening conference of the Royal Society “Geoengineering: taking control of our planet’ s climate” picketed by Hands Off Mother Earth anti-geoengineering activists despite cold and rain.
Picketers unfolded a large banner saying “Our planet is not your experiment” Picket participant Alex Ludd was reported as saying, “A simple and socially just solution already exists: We can cut carbon emissions now. Royal Society participation in the geoengineering lobby is bringing the topic in from the science fiction margins into climate change policy discussions. Geoengineering is a diversion, especially of money, from urgent adaptation and mitigation needs.
“What we need is a thousand candles of brilliant research, not a new Manhatten project. The Royal Society has been very good at standing up for climate science, but it would be terrible for them to blow their reputation by catering to the fantasy of oil companies and climate change deniers that some kind of magic band-aid will make the problem go away. ”
“While the United Nations has banned experiments that endanger biodiversity and the life systems of the earth OECD nations are investing research money into geoengineering schemes. The rich polluter nations have tried to ignore the rest of the world and replace a UN climate treaty with their own phony agreement. We need to let them know that we won’t let them do this with our planet and our life support systems.”
A flyer handed out to about a third of the conference participants read in part:
We are here to oppose GEOENGINEERING. We hope that many scientists will speak out against these science fiction schemes. Geoengineering is an irresponsible diversion from urgent adaptation and mitigation needs to prepare for climate crisis.
The Royal Society has been very good at standing up for climate science. It would be terrible for them to now blow their reputation by catering to the fantasy of oil companies and climate change deniers that some kind of magic band-aid will make the problem go away.
Scientists must consider whether they are in danger of being politically naive. What for scientists is an interesting hypothetical problem and at best a plan of last resort will quickly become the only plan for oil companies, climate change deniers and right wing politicians.