It is quite simply one of the latest new categories of “schemes”, cooked up by the likes of Obama’s Science and Technology Czar John Holdren, to “engineer” a solution to global warming.
In Feb of 2010, four scientists testified to the US Congress Subcommittee on Energy and Environment about GeoEngineering. Click here to read their testimony. They were Dr Robert Jackson (Duke University), and Dr. Phil Rasch, Dr David Keith, and Dr Klaus Lackner.
Here are the opening remarks from (then) Rep. Bob Inglis, SC (former Ranking Member of the Subcommittee on Energy and Environment):
“Good morning, and thank you for holding this hearing, Mr. Chairman. I look forward to discussing the scientific and engineering challenges related to geoengineering.
Last November, the full committee began our examination of geoengineering as a strategy to minimize the impacts of a warming climate. What we heard was theoretically promising: geoengineering may prove to be a low-cost intervention to buy us time to reduce our greenhouse gas emissions and limit our impact on the global climate system.
Still, we face considerable uncertainty. Dr. Rasch appropriately describes geoengineering as a
“gamble” in his testimony. Is this a gamble worth trying? At this hearing, I hope to hear what steps we need to take to increase our understanding of geoengineering technologies and come one step closer to determining whether this is a viable option.
In particular, I hope that the witnesses will discuss what technologies, techniques, and capabilities must be developed to study and deploy geoengineering options, and what level of financial investment is required for these developments. I also hope the witnesses will discuss the gaps in our understanding of the climate system that may limit our ability to justify such large-scale intervention, and which alternatives may minimize further changes to the climate, resource cycles, or global ecology.
We also need to decide whether investments in geoengineering are worthwhile. There are a number of ecological, economic, and political uncertainties that also need to be addressed before these
interventionist strategies are implemented. Moreoever, there is a significant ethical question involved in deploying large-scale geoengineering techniques to forcibly change the climate in an effort to undo the damage we have already done. I hope to address these questions in a future hearing.
Again, thank you for holding this important hearing, Mr. Chairman. I look forward to hearing from the witnesses and I yield back the balance of my time.”
Below I have pasted a small part of Dr. Jackson’s testimony from Feb of 2010. Dr Jackson briefed the Subcommittee on several GeoEngineering ”schemes” as Holdren referred to them. Dr Jackson refers to “Land-Use” geoengineering schemes such as “restoring or planting forests, avoiding deforestation, and using croplands to reflect sunlight and store carbon in soils”
He also testifies to “Land Based” geoengineering such as “Solar Radiation Management“. Below is an excerpt from Dr Jackson’s testimomy:
TESTIMONY OF ROBERT B. JACKSON DIRECTOR, CENTER ON GLOBAL CHANGE NICHOLAS PROFESSOR OF GLOBAL ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGE & BIOLOGY DUKE UNIVERSITY before the SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY COMMITTEE U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES February 4, 2010
Biological and Land-Based Strategies for Geoengineering Earth’s Climate
As described in the recent Royal Society report, Geoengineering the Climate, many
geoengineering options are possible. One set of activities focuses on carbon dioxide removal.
The other examines how to manage systems to reflect sunlight and cool the planet, termed solar
radiation management.
Managing solar radiation directly is an alternative to removing carbon dioxide from air. In effect
these approaches manipulate “climate” directly, or at least temperature. The most common
approach for cooling is reflecting sunlight back into space. You only have to reflect a small
percentage of the sun’s rays to counterbalance the temperature effects of a doubling of
atmospheric carbon dioxide.
Managing solar radiation is thus the basis for many geoengineering
strategies, including stratospheric dust seeding and whitening clouds over the oceans.
Dr Phil Rasch
Dr Rasch is the Chief Scientist for Climate Science at the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory.
Here are a few titles of his research work on GeoEngineering:
”An overview of geoengineering of climate using stratospheric sulphate aerosols.” Chapter 12 in Geo-Engineering Climate Change: Environmental Necessity or Pandora’s Box?, ed. Brian Launder and J. Michael T. Thompson, pp. 250-285 Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
Rasch PJ, J Latham, and CC Chen. 2009. ”Geoengineering by cloud seeding: influence on sea ice and climate system .” Environmental Research Letters 4(4):Article number: 045112. doi:10.1088/1748-9326/4/4/045112
“Do biomass burning aerosols intensify drought in equatorial Asia during El Ni.” Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics 10(8):3515-3528. doi:10.5194/acp-10-3515-2010
“Initiative to improve process representation in chemistry-climate models.” Eos 90(24):206-207. doi:10.1029/2009EO240002
“Impact of geoengineered aerosols on the troposphere and stratosphere.” Journal of Geophysical Research. D. (Atmospheres) 114:Article No. D12305. doi:10.1029/2008JD011420
”Impact of anthropogenic aerosols on Indian summer monsoon.” Geophysical Research Letters 36:Article No. L21704. doi:10.1029/2009GL040114
“Exploring the Geoengineering of Climate Using Stratospheric Sulfate Aerosols: The Role of Particle Size.” Geophysical Research Letters 35: Art. No. L02809.
“Geo-Engineering Climate Change with Sulfate.” Geophysical Research Letters 35:L02809.1-L02809.6
The third to testify was Dr. David Keith, Adjunct Professor, Department of Physics and Astronomy and Faculty of Environmental Design, University of Calgary, Department of Engineering and Public Policy, Carnegie Mellon University.
I have linked the video below Dr Keith gave in 2007 about Solar Radiation geoengineering “solution” to global warming. In this video he states:
“So this problem is absolutely soluble- this geoengineering idea, in it’s simplest form, is basically the following. You could put signed particles, say sulfuric acid particles- sulfates- into the upper atmosphere, the stratosphere, where they’d reflect away sunlight and cool the planet. And I know for certain that that will work- not that there aren’t side effects- but I know for certain it will work, and the reason is, it’s been done. And it was done not by us, not by me, but by nature.”
From this brillaint ”leap of faith” of how erupting volcanoes cool down temperatures, Dr Keith would have us believe we can “geoengineer” the atmosphere ourselves to combat global warming. This would entail as Dr Jackson’s testimony suggests, “stratospheric dust seeding” particulate into the stratosphere that would reflect sunlight away from the Earth thereby reducing the temperature.
So what’s the big deal?
Many reports suggest these “particulate” could be made of aluminum. Aluminum, if ingested into the human body at even low levels, is TOXIC. I had totally blown off the “chemtrail” stuff as paranoid delusion. But with the Congressional Testimony from 2010, and studies that date back to 2005, its deployment is indeed very plausible in my view.
Aluminum has been proven to cause neurological damage to brain tissue. Could this be a reason the prevalance of Alzheimers (a neurologic disorder about which still not much is known) increased 10% between 2002 and 2007? Could the ingestion of geoengineering experimental aluminum particulate be responsible for such a tremendous spike in this disease?
CONGRESS HAS BEEN BRIEFED…THE PRESIDENT HAS BEEN BRIEFED…HAVE YOU?
The author of the bestselling book The Creature from Jeckyl Island, would like to brief you. He has produced a video documenting many aspects of this global warming scheme. The following is a 2 minute trailer that you should watch and decide for yourself if the useful idiots in Congress have been doing this already.
If you would like to purchase a copy of this DVD click here
Neal Thomas
