> Probably one of the only short term options between now and 2100 will be solar radiation management -- a largely untested tech that is surely a terrible outcome.
Maybe it's time to put a billion or two into testing all these untested techs then.
That's what I find so baffling. Why aren't we putting serious resources into geoengineering, adaptation and mitigation? It's so underfunded in comparison to what we're spending in a futile attempt at emission reduction.
Because there's no economic incentive. We can only create one with proper policies, but politics have been bootlegged by industry who only looks at short-term gains.
> Why aren't we putting serious resources into geoengineering, adaptation and mitigation?
Are you running for president of the US? What do you think would happen to either candidate if they made this central their platform in today's political environment?
Spoiler: rich old people will not suffer, if anything, they'll just stop moving to Florida and Arizona.
Maybe it's time to put a billion or two into testing all these untested techs then.