Page 284 - James Rodger Fleming - Fixing the sky

1. What can I know?
2. What should I do?
3. What may I hope?” 106

These general questions are of immense theoretical, practical, and moral import.
Here we conclude by applying them to weather and climate control.

n What can I know? We know that climate is nebulous, complex, and unpre-
dictable. We know that it is always changing, on all temporal and spatial scales;
and we know few of the turbulent details: what the weather will be next week
or if a sudden and disruptive climate change looms in the near or distant future.
We know that humans, especially the “Takers,” have perturbed the climate system
through agriculture, by the burning of fossil fuels, and by the sum total of many
additional practices. We do not know the ultimate outcome of all this, but we
strongly suspect that it may not be good. We know that weather and climate con-
trol has a checkered history, rooted in hubris and populated with charlatans and
sincere but misguided scientists; we also know that most plans for weather and
climate control were speculative responses to the urgent problems of the day and
were based on then-fashionable cutting-edge technologies—cannon, chemicals,
electric discharges, airplanes, H-bombs, space probes, computers—with much
of it military in origin. We know that those who understand the climate system
best are most humbled by its complexity and are among the least likely to claim
that they have simple, safe, or cheap ways to “fix” it. We also know that many
weather and climate engineers thought they were the “first generation” to think
about these things and, since they faced “unprecedented” problems, were some-
how exempt from historical precedents. on the contrary, they were critically in
need of historical precedents.
n What should I do? We should all be asking this question and working
together to implement the most reasonable, just, and effective answers. My
colleagues at the Climate Institute are eloquent supporters of middle course
solutions, but they also advocate responsible geoengineering research, while
107
educating and gently correcting the speculators. Some have asked if the risk
of geoengineering is worse than the risk of global warming. I think that it just
might be, especially if we neglect the historical precedents and cultural implica-
tions. We should cultivate a healthy dose of humility, even awe, before the com-
plexities of nature (and human nature). Do not propose simplistic technical
solutions to complex socioeconomic problems; do not even propose simplistic
socioeconomic solutions. Do not claim credit for unverifiable results. Adopt the
Hippocratic prescription for a planetary fever: “to help, or at least to do no harm.”

tHe Climate enGineerS | 267