Argument: Better ways to fight climate change than geoenngineering

Issue Report: Geoengineering


Lisa Hymas. “We need birth control, not geoengineering.” The Ghink Chronicle. Grist. April 6th, 2010: “Most green groups don’t like to talk about all this — population has become the third rail of the environmental community (more on that in a future post). Technologists don’t like to either — they’d rather talk about traveling-wave nuclear reactors and CO2-sucking machines and space sunshades. We do need to explore and invest in cleantech options; climate change is serious enough that it requires all of our best efforts in all arenas. But it may be that many of the technologies with the most potential for averting climate change already exist — the Pill, the condom, the IUD. We just need to spread them far and wide. Baby stroller crossed-out in greenGINK: green inclinations, no kidsBetter still, providing contraception to women who lack it is one of the most cost-effective ways to curb greenhouse-gas emissions. Each $7 spent on basic family planning over the next four decades would reduce global CO2 emissions by more than a metric ton, while achieving that same reduction with the leading low-carbon technologies would cost a minimum of $32, according to a recent study by the London School of Economics [PDF], commissioned by the Optimum Population Trust.”