Welcome to the Geoengineering Schemes Section of the ADC Website
Geoengineering is defined as "planetary-scale enviromental engineering of our atmosphere, our weather, the oceans, and the Earth itself". The methods, schemes, that may now be used without public oversight, debate, prior public notification, U.S. Congress or any oversight are staggering in number and scope.
GEOENGINEERING ALERT 2012 - FOR INFORMATION VISIT:
The Congressional Research Service released it new report on Geoengineering for members of the U.S. Congress on August 16, 2010. The U.S. House Science & Technology Committee released their Final Geoengineering Report on October 27, 2010. The U.S. House Science and Technology Committee on Geoengineering is working with the UK Parliament on Global Geoengineering Governance which has released its 5th Report (printed by the House of Commons), on March 10, 2010.
(Update: We should all remember that volcanoes erupt each year negating the need for any geoengineering schemes to be deployed. In March 2010, a volcano in Iceland erupted and sent an ash cloud spreading over Europe which lasted for months and may have created global cooling along with acid rains which will have negative impacts on trees, water supplies, oceans, and soils. Earth's natural systems are still working...and we can't afford for man to add to these problems or exacerbate them by deploying more toxic chemicals, gases, and particles into the atmosphere to reduce the amount of direct sunlight reaching the Earth.
Each unpredictable volcanic eruption on Earth adds pollution and changes our global atmosphere.
A few geoengineers have been on the news in recent days stating that the Iceland volcano will not cause any cooling...in order to keep promoting geoengineering as an option. It should be noted that other scientists have been stating for the news media that these volcanic plumes will change the weather and also that there are acid rains and human health problems which could be associated with this and other periodic eruptions.
Geoengineers have no advance notice of volcanic eruptions nor will they know when future eruptions will take place. Thus, we have to consider these natural events and measure them their synergistic and cumulative effects before considering artificial geoengineering schemes. In addition, the synergistic and cumulative effects of their proposed geoengineering schemes, and what influence natural future volcanic eruptions will have, is unknown. It is now time to permanently stop man-made geoengineering schemes.
Many private corporations, universities, government agencies, private individuals, states, counties, and cities, have deployed, or will will deploy, a vast array of geoengineering experiments in the near future without public oversight or consent. Currently no government agency, or the U.S. Congress at this time, will have any idea what the cumulative or synergistic effects may be when these experiments are deployed. In addition, no one, not even the U.S. Congress or the public, will have any oversight of these programs, the chemicals or particles that will be used or how these schemes will be implemented. Thus, action is needed today to prevent these questionable experiments.
The U.S. House Science & Technology Committee and the UK Parliament have engaged in an agreement to participate in geoengineering discussions and the possible implementation of global geoengineering governance proposed by the Royal Society and several climate scientists. Meetings continue to be held around the world to promote the implementation of more programs.
The purpose of one set of schemes is to initiate “Solar Radiation Management (SRM)” experiments. SRM is designed to reduce the amount of direct sunlight reaching the Earth. The consequences of these SRM schemes are unknown since planetary-scale engineering involves so many different geoengineering schemes with unknown cumulative and synergistic effects.
A key AAAS February 2010, geoengineering write-up states: “…Studies show, however, that people make judgments based primarily on their values, belief systems, world views, and emotions.Facts play a much more minor role.This gap cannot be bridged by loading the public with facts, or trying to make the public more science literate…” Thus, a whole series of presentations were made to advise geoengineers and others on how to manipulate the public so that they would support these schemes.
In a Press Release Dated December of 2002 titled: “GEOENGINEERING TOO RISKY” A Lawrence Livermore Laboratory Press release warns, “…There are many reasons why geoengineering is not a preferred option for climate stabilization...” These prescriptions include risks of global “system failure” and the “unpredictable responses” of Earth's climate system to large-scale human intervention…”
On March 22-26, 2010, the Climate Respond Fund (note the partners listing in the document section below), sponsored the Asilomar International Conference on Climate Intervention Technologies in Monterey, California. The conference was designed to develop (global geoengineering governance) guidelines for “…research and testing of proposed climate intervention and geoengineering technologies…”
What are the consequences of deploying Solar Radiation Management geoengineering experiments?
1) Some of these experiments are designed to reduce the amount of direct sunlight reaching the Earth thus reducing the power output and the effectiveness of solar panels and solar cars.
2) Many proposed chemicals or particles used in these geoengineering schemes (i.e., U.S. Navy/NASA C.A.R.E. experiment used a rocket to create an aluminum oxide dust cloud over the Eastern portion of the U.S. on September 19, 2009), are likely to be toxic to humans, marine mammals, oceans, fish, wildlife, food pollinators, and birds. Many of these toxic chemicals, like sulfur, have the potential to contaminate drinking water, soil, cause acid rain or air pollution, and may impair human health, from lack of Vitamin D, by reducing the amount of sunlight reaching the Earth.
3) NASA research studies show that increasingly persistent jet contrails may turn into “man-made clouds” (or white haze), and are “…trapping warmth in the atmosphere and exacerbating global warming…Any change in global cloud cover may contribute to long-term changes in the Earth’s climate…” No current U.S. legislation addresses water vapor and aviation impacts on the global atmosphere. In addition, our scientists do not appear to be funding or working toward reducing or eliminating this problem. What happens when additional programs are put in place to reduce the amount of sunlight reaching the Earth when we already have man-made clouds dimming the sun and exacerbating global warming?
4) SRM may limit Honey Bee food pollination because the bee navigates and communicates though the use of ultraviolet light. And we have no idea what the cumulative impacts of toxic chemicals, particles, and reduced sunlight will have on all of our pollinators endangering food production.
5) Photosynthesis is required for the majority of life on Earth to exist, along with healthy trees, and food crop production. When cloud cover and reduced sunlight is present crop production drops. When direct sunlight and normal rainfall is present crop production increases. What happens when geoengineers deliberate reduce the amount of direct sunlight reaching the Earth? What are the consequences of multiple uncontrolled experiments?
The climate scientists and geoengineers all have one repeated mantra: “…Geoengineering is not a solution to climate change and global warming…” They are instead enlisting support to spend enormous sums to buy time to do something later. Just what research, project funding, and development are they now engaging in to fix our current pollution problems now? Nothing! They are not promoting research into benefits that will be long-lasting or make a difference now.
The “temporary fix” theory with “unknown consequences” seems to be their only contribution to the disaster they predict. Should the public be willing to accept this temporary fix with unknown consequences? This attitude is unacceptable because those conducting the geoengineering experiments will be unaccountable if their experiments go awry or create profound negative consequences.
Professor Benford (U.C. Irvine, CA), wrote the following regarding the public in a Reason.com article in 1997: “…But perhaps the greatest unknown is social: How will the politically aware public react--those who vote, anyway? If geoengineers are painted early and often as Dr. Strangeloves of the air, they will fail. Properly portrayed as allies of science--and true environmentalism--they could become heroes… A major factor here will be whether mitigation looks like yet another top-down contrivance, another set of orders from the elite. Draconian policing of fuel burning will certainly look that way, a frowning Aunt Bessie elbowing into daily details...In contrast, mitigation does not have to push a new camel's nose into our tents... Technical solutions can play out far from people's lives, on the sea or high in the air…Once we become caretakers, we cannot stop...(they) must be carried forward in the shadow of our stewardship…"
Instead of questionable geoengineering experiments all reductions of greenhouse gas emissions and other pollutants, at their source, should be regulated by the Environmental Protection Agency and all funding should go to the EPA for developing alternative energy and transportation. Scientists and researchers should be funded to invent ways to use waste energy from currently operating energy plants to produce clean, green power, and reduce greenhouse gas emissions is where funding should be directed…not to those programs and experiments that will not reduce our impact on Earth from various types of pollution sources. The energy of the geoengineers should be redirected to solve pollution problems not add to them.
On June 10, 2010, the U.S. Senate voted to uphold a 2007, U.S. Supreme Court Decision, that allows the EPA to regulated and reduce greenhouse gas emissions. There is no reason to initiate global geoengineering programs when we have the ability to reduce pollution under our laws. Reduction is the preferred alternative to pollution...not adding more toxic contaminates to our atmosphere that will impact life on Earth as we know it.
Our local, county, state and federal representatives should take immediate action to stop these geoengineering scheme deployments until scientists from every field, agriculture interests, ocean scientists, marine biologists, and the public have had time to thoroughly investigate these schemes and their effects on the Earth’s environment.
No one has the right to use the Earth, or Earth’s atmosphere, as a giant experimental physics laboratory due to the unknown consequences of such actions.
State and U.S. Congressional Hearings should be immediately held in order to completely investigate the consequences of proposed and ongoing geoengineering experiments by any individual, state, county, private corporation, the U.S. military, university or U.S. government agencies on agriculture, crop production, human health, and our oceans. There is a lot at stake and all of us should make our voices heard in this debate.
Radio Liberty 2011 Seminar "Geoengineering the Atmosphere" by Rosalind Peterson Special Presentation by Allan Buckmann Aptos, CA - October 23, 2011
You are missing some Flash content that should appear here! Perhaps your browser cannot display it, or maybe it did not initialize correctly.
The United States has been releasing Aluminum and other toxic chemicals (along with rocket fuel emissions), into the atmosphere in order to conduct various atmospheric experiments. It is no suprise tha the whales in all ocean areas were found to have high levels of aluminum.
Bill Gates (Microsoft) has decided to become involved in Geoengineering Schemes. He is funding a few scientists who wish to engage in implementing these schemes. In addition, he has given money to various private corporations to conduct experiments.
Any individual with money and other resources, private corporations, governments, and others can use our atmoshere or oceans as an experimental physics laboratory. Universities and NASA have conducted such experiments, along with our military, for years.
It is outrageous that anyone can subject us to these experiments without our consent. And what right does Bill Gates or anyone else have to "play God" with the Earth and the Earth's atmosphere? It is these questions which must be answered before more of these experiments and schemes are conducted.
Note: Professor Gregory Benford of U.C. Irving stated in his article on Arctic Geoengineering on November 20, 2006: “…This idea is only the first step in making climate science…into an active science… This is not a new transition in scientific style…We will live inside the experiment …The main thrust of all this is to carefully use our ability to attack warming at its roots – incoming sunlight now, carbon dioxide later… Costs seem readily attainable – perhaps a few hundred of millions of dollars for an Arctic experiment. High altitude trials over the open ocean are little constrained by law or treaty, so show-stopper politics may be avoided…”
Funding: January 28, 2010 Wired Science: Bill Gates has sunk at least $4.5 million of his personal wealth into geoengineering research.
http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2010/01/bill-gates-paying-for-climate-hacking-resear “…While it’s a small chunk of Gates’ vast personal fortune, it’s a sign that the founder of Microsoft thinks we should at least be looking into the controversial practice of intentionally altering the Earth’s climate on a global scale. “[Gates] views geoengineering as a way to buy time, but it’s not a solution to the problem” of climate change, Gates’ spokesperson John Pinette told Science Insider. “Bill views this as an important avenue for research — among many others, including new forms of clean energy.”
The money will be directed by two high-level scientists at the forefront of geoengineering research: climate scientist Ken Caldeira, of Stanford’s Carnegie Department of Global Ecology, and physicist David Keith of the University of Calgary. They will decide which technologies should receive the cash in order to alter the stratosphere to reflect solar energy, filter carbon dioxide directly from the atmosphere and brighten ocean clouds...”
“…In a related development Keith, one of the scientists directing Gates’ money, co-authored a Nature editorial this week calling for an international fund for “solar-radiation management” in addition to traditional carbon emissions cuts. “Solar-radiation management may be the only human response that can fend off rapid and high-consequence climate change impacts,” Keith said in a press release Wednesday… He and his co-authors, Edward Parson at the University of Michigan and Granger Morgan at CarnegieMellon University, propose a budget for solar-radiation management (aka geoengineering), beginningwith $10 million a year now and growing to $1 billion annually by the end of 2020. The organizationthat manages the funds would also develop the governance structures to provide transparent risk analysis and manage feedback from the world’s countries…” Thus, there would be no Congressional or public oversight...complete freedom to use the oceans and the atmosphere as a private physics laboratory.
Click on the poster above to see it in full size.
The information below in the form of pdf files are all of the information on geoengineering that is in my database at this time. More geoengineering information will be made available whenever new information becomes available. We do know that the implementation of ocean and atmospheric geoengineering has already started without public consent or oversight. What we need to do now is to put a stop to these programs.
Water Vapor is a Greenhouse Gas. Aviation has Tremendous Impacts on the Earth and our Atmosphere.
Our Elected Officials, Bill Gates, NOAA, NASA, and other other government agencies should be working to solve the pollution, ozone, and water vapor aviation issues. We know from NASA and other studies that Aviation has negative impacts on our atmosphere. Why isn't this issue being addressed? Why are the climate scientists that are promoting geoengineering schemes not working to resolve these aviation issues? We could reduce pollution if investments were made in this area of research. Instead wild geoengineering schemes which will make things worse are being funded. Why?
Geoengineering: Destroying The Atmosphere with Rosalind Peterson - Uploaded by TheAlexJonesChannel on Feb 25, 2012 - Global Geoengineering Governance: Currently the U.S. Government, our military, NASA (other U.S. agencies), any city, county, state, private individuals, corporations, foreign governments, and foreign corporations, can initiate any type of geoengineering or weather modification experiments without public knowledge, consent, government restrictions or public debate. (Water Vapor produced by Aviation is contributing to warming of area like Alaska & the Arctic according to recent university studies. NASA notes that jet contrails turning into man-made clouds exacerbates global warming since water vapor is a greenhouse gas.)
In it's February 2000 report 'Aviation and the Environment', the US Government Accountability Office states: "Aviation emissions are a potentially significant and growing percentage of greenhouse gases and other emissions that are thought to contribute to global warming. Aircraft emissions are potentially significant for several reasons. First, jet aircraft are the main source of human emissions deposited directly into the upper atmosphere, where they may have a greater warming effect than if they were released at the earth's surface. 'According to data from a 1999 report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, global aviation contributed about 145 million metric tons of carbon in 1996, or about 2.4 percent of all human-generated carbon emissions – an amount roughly equivalent to the total carbon emissions of Canada'." Summary (HTML) - Full Report (PDF) | Abstract IPPC 1999 Report (HTML)
May 12, 2011 BBC News Report-Video
"...US embassy cables released show nations are racing to "carve up" Arctic resources - oil, gas and even rubies - as the ice retreats. They suggest that Arctic states, including the US and Russia, are all pushing to stake a claim. The opportunity to exploit resources has come because of a dramatic fall in the amount of ice in the Arctic. The US Geological Survey estimates oil reserves off Greenland are as big as those in the North Sea.
The cables were released by the Wikileaks whistleblower website as foreign ministers from the eight Arctic Council member states - Russia, the United States, Canada, Denmark, Norway, Finland, Sweden and Iceland - met in Nuuk, Greenland, on Thursday to sign a treaty on international search and rescue in the Arctic and discuss the region's future challenges. The cables claim the Danish Foreign Minister Per Stig Moeller joked with the Americans saying "if you stay out, then the rest of us will have more to carve up in the Arctic"..."
Speakers: M. Granger Morgan, Head, Department of Engineering & Public Policy, Carnegie Mellon University John D. Steinbruner, Director, Center for International & Security Studies, University of Maryland Presider: Ruth Greenspan Beill, Acting U.S. Climate Policy Director, World Resources Institute
November 15, 2007
Environmental scientist David Keith proposes a cheap, effective, shocking means to address climate change: What if we injected a huge cloud of ash into the atmosphere to deflect sunlight and heat.
X 1 Photograph Calpella CA Mendocino County, CA 2005 by Rosalind Peterson "X" Marks the Spot.
Persistent Jet Contrails that turn into man-made clouds, according to NASA studies, exacerbate global warming, change our climate, and negatively impact natural resources. The jets that leave these persistent contrails are engaged in a type of atmospheric geoengineering which may have other negative consequences.
Persistant jet contrails also produce white haze and cirrus clouds which may have reduced the amount of direct sunlight reaching the earth, disrupted plant and tree health due to lack of photosynthesis, and lowered crop production at various times in the past twenty years due to the extreme amount of man-made cloud cover in Northern California.
This type of persistent jet contrail first appeared in Mendocino County in the late 1980s when the configuration of military jet fuel changed from JP-4 to JP-8 with additives. Mendocino and the adjoining Lake County (in Northern Califonria), also became Military Operations Areas (Listed as MOA 1, 2 & 3 on NOAA Flight Maps), without the consent or knowledge of most of the residents in these counties.
Agenda Steve Paikin — March 18, 2010 — Is geoengineering the answer to the world's climate change woes? Guests: John Stone is adjunct research professor at Carleton University.
Alan Robock is distinguished professor of Climatology, director of the Meteorology Undergraduate Program, and associate director of the Center for Environmental Prediction Department of Environmental Sciences at Rutgers University.
David Keith is director of ISEEE Energy and Environmental Systems Group, the Canada research chair in Energy and the Environment at the University of Calgary.
San Francisco Commonwealth Club Video: Geoengineering Global Salvation or Ruin? February 23, 2010
Uploaded by StanfordUniversity on Mar 22, 2011
January 31, 2011
David Keith, Professor of Chemical and Petroleum Engineering at the University of Calgary, explores possibilities for the intentional alteration of Earth's radiation budget as a means to mitigate risks to Earth's climate and human society in the face of insufficient or ineffective emissions reduction efforts.
A Small Group of Individuals, Professors, Climate Scientists, and others have been promoting Geoengineering programs and experiments for the past ten years. There are a very few who have raised serious questions about these experiments. You will find below names that have been engaged in the last few years speaking about Geoengineering Schemes. A few note potential consequences from these experiments, like air and water pollution or acid rains. The majority of promoters want to experiment no matter what the consequences advising the public that we should be the guinea pigs living inside their experiments. A few have even stated that if people are harmed it doesn't matter...that they feel that this is a price we should all pay so that they can conduct their experiments.
NASA JPL Presentation on Geoengineering & Climate Change February 14, 2013 Video Lecture Series California Institute of Technology - What type of thinking is going on now with regard to Geoengineering?
MAJOR SOLAR FLARE: This morning at 0805 UT, sunspot 1263 produced a powerful X7-class solar flare. NASA's Solar Dynamics Observatory captured the explosion's extreme ultraviolet flash-See Video. The brunt of the explosion was not Earth directed. Nevertheless, a minor proton storm is in progress around our planet, which could affect satellites in high-altitude orbits. Also, radiation from flare created waves of ionization in Earth's upper atmosphere, briefly disrupting communications at some VLF and HF radio frequencies.SOHO coronagraphs show a CME emerging from the blast site. The cloud will probably miss Earth. At this time, however, we cannot rule out a glancing blow from the flank of the CME on or about August 11th, 2011.
"Geoengineering Earth's Climate" by Ken Caldeira January 7, 2008 Presentation on Video This talk will present much of what is known about such geoengineering approaches, and raise a range of issues likely to stimulate lively discussion. Speaker: Ken Caldeira
Ken Caldeira is a scientist at the Carnegie Institution Department of Global Ecology and a Professor (by courtesy) at the Stanford University Department of Environmental and Earth System Sciences. Previously, he worked for 12 years in the Energy and Environment Directorate at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (Department of Energy). His research interests include the numerical simulation of Earth's climate, carbon, and biogeochemistry; ocean acidification; climate emergency response systems; evaluating approaches to supplying environmentally-friendly energy services; ocean carbon sequestration; long-term evolution of climate and geochemical cycles; and marine biogeochemical cycles. Caldeira has a B.A. in Philosophy from Rutgers College and an M.S. and Ph.D. in Atmospheric Sciences from New York University.
"...Caldeira: I used to work at Lawrence Livermore Lab where we all participated in a meeting. Where we sat around the room thinking of ways to manipulate geophysical systems to use it as a weapon. That means could you somehow interfere with the Earth’s functioning in a way that you could use it as a military weapon. Could you change climate, what could you do to manipulate the Earth’s physical system. Some of the ideas were, could we blow up hydrogen bombs underwater or offshore to make a tidal wave that would go over a city. The result was isn't it easier to drop the hydrogen bomb on the city. Now, you could imagine putting pathogens in a cloud. Let the cloud go over somewhere and rain down on your enemy, do chemical or germ warfare. That may work on something as big as the former Soviet Union, where you could be pretty sure that in a few days that cloud would rain out..."
16Z 2009 Climate Gate "Key Players" Video - No Comment
16Z 2009 Climate Gate "Key Players" Video - No Comment
Few branches of science divide opinion as sharply as that championed by Professor David Keith. He's one of the pre-eminent geo-engineers striving to find new ways to combat global warming, by altering the way the sea, the clouds and the atmosphere work. This isn't a replacement, he says, for the political drive to reduce emissions. But is geo-engineering a cost-effective, emergency stop-gap, before the effects of climate change become irreversible, or a dangerous leap into the unknown?
Space Chronicles http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/305092-1 Neil deGrasse Tyson talks about the history and future of NASA and the US space program. He argues that the exploration of space benefits Americans more than they may think. Hosted by theAmerican Museum of Natural Historyin New York City.
Using Aerosol Injections for Geoengineering - Joyce Penner, University of Michigan - Video