“These are super-rich people who want to continue business as usual.”

The report published by the University of Chicago (USA) last July, “Intervention in Glacial Climate: A Research Perspective”almostairair Do not touch it. For example, it is mentioned “The urgent need to reduce our consumption of fossil fuels” And recommends “Research to determine whether interventions may be feasible.”But since Little Red Riding Hood has taken on the guise of his good grandmother, this report may not reveal everything that geoengineering has to hide. Heidi SivesterHeidi Sivester He shares his experience on this topic.

Heidi Sivester: When the geoengineering community started to form, we didn't pay attention to it.

But they worked. Never giving up. Now they have almost unlimited funding and, in fact, enormous political lobbying power. Their media power is also important. To ensure this, they surround themselves with the best contacts/lobbyists on the planet. Today, there is a huge interest behind geoengineering and we need to take it seriously. We are preparing a strong response to the report that was published this summer.

Have you had the opportunity to discuss with proponents of geoengineering?

Heidi Sivester: I recently met with the people responsible for that. Arctic ReflectionsThe idea of ​​this. StartStart The Dutch method involves deploying tens of thousands of pumps on the ice to pump water from the Arctic Ocean and spray it onto the floating ice. The goal: to thicken and whiten the ice so that it reflects sunlight. sunsun Towards space. These people are not bad people. They are product developers. Their job is to innovate and then sell. They think they are doing good. They even think they are giving hope. But they do not think about all the consequences. On the narwhal that can be heard 40 kilometers away and that will undoubtedly be disturbed by the noise of all these pumps. They also do not think about some logistical issues. The question of energy used is central. To operate their pumps, at the moment, it will be… by the starsFossil fuels. We will bring pollution to the heart of the ice floe. We walk on our heads.

Logistical questions? However, the main argument of geoengineering proponents is to buy humans time to deal with climate change.

Heidi Sivester: Absolutely. But that’s not quite right. By addressing the consequences of climate change, they promise to buy us time to adapt. Geoengineers also claim they can do it faster than decarbonization. However, any scientist knows that organizing a drilling campaignSouth PoleSouth Poleobtain a license to add a very small unit to a base on this continent. “Peace and Science” Or finding boats to tow facilities into this hostile area would take decades of work. Decarbonization can have rapid effects. During the Covid crisis, we saw some GlaciersGlaciers It has regained its strength. The pollution has decreased and it has become less black. carboncarbonThey absorbed less. heatheat From the sun. So cleaning the exits of our factories can have a dramatic effect very quickly.

Therefore, there is real hope in the “classical” solutions…

Heidi Sivester: Sure. But not everyone has an interest in knowing that. These are the wealthy people who want to get on with their lives. Business as usualat any cost. They do not hesitate to launch a crusade with geoengineering to manipulate ideas. I also met young people from the NGO Arctic OperationIt is funded by Silver Lining, an American philanthropist who largely funds geoengineering. By funding this NGO, they are making the younger generation believe that there is a whole range of solutions to combat the consequences of this. climate changeclimate change But we simply refuse to study it.

These young people challenge us in the media and at international conferences. They do not understand that while the world around them is collapsing, there are solutions that we refuse to explore. They make us look like extremists. And today, it has become violent for us. “If the Marshall Islands are flooded, it will be your fault.” This is what we hear from indigenous communities who are also against geoengineering. But I hope that one day they will realize that they have been manipulated to push the agenda of people who just want to make more and more money.moneymoneyThe unfortunate thing is that for these young people, the backlash, the disappointed hope, may become difficult to overcome.

Is there any hope left?

Heidi Sifster: Yes, because some countries have already said no to geoengineering. Sweden. Mexico. And because indigenous peoples are also very clear about this. At COP28, geoengineers literally tried to sell their idea of ​​climate change. curtaincurtain submarinesubmarine To the Palau ambassador. But she realized through their game that she stood firm and maintained her opposition to any idea of ​​such a project in Antarctica or Greenland. She knows that decarbonization is the best solution by far. Because Indigenous communities have You kept something we sorely lack today. topictopicThis holistic view helps them realize that the idea is not a good one. They do not believe in Santa Claus.

conclusion?

Heidi Sivester: It will be a tough fight. I want to make it clear that I am not against technology in general. I just want to avoid repeating the mistakes of the past. Geoengineering will not buy us time. It will only distract us from the real problem: our problem. BroadcastBroadcast Of greenhouse gases. We don't need more time and money to find out. We already have a lot of literature available on this issue.

I feel sad when I see the unity of our society beginning to crumble over this issue. I am not throwing stones at my colleagues who are finally heeding the call of geoengineering. They are horrified by what is happening in the polar regions and I think they are sincerely looking for solutions. But the first solution, which must be repeated, even if it means appearing monomaniacal, is decarbonization. We know it works. We know how to do it. Will it be expensive? Geoengineering too. And perhaps more so if we include the costs of the consequences of these manipulations. While we have everything to gain from decarbonization. We have to stop seeing only the efforts it requires of us. Redefining the passage of time, the way we work, our exchanges, inequality, diversity, human health. Decarbonization has only good sides. Whereas behind geoengineering are powerful interests. People who have no interest in changing things for the good of all.