Extreme projects are now being studied on an international basis: One would involve 16 Trillion mirrors to deflect the sun's rays from the earth's surface. This project requires placing the mirrors one million miles out into Space.
Another involves the covering of the remaining glaciers with a material that would reflect the sun's rays thus minimizing the melting of the ice.
Another is addressing the melting of frozen methane at the bottom of the warming sea, which is now converting to gas and bubbling into the atmosphere.
The enormity of the problem solving and ingenuity that is going into curbing Climate Change is without parallel, even greater than the building of the atomic bomb in WWII.
Millions of dollars have already been spent on the pre-feasibility studies of these projects.
Millions of dollars more, and months and months of time, will be necessary to complete the feasibility studies if they are warranted.
Billions, even trillions of dollars will have to be allocated for the implementation phases over years and years. Where will the money come from?
Copenhagen did not resolve how the existing Climate Change programs for cutting greenhouse gas emissions and the creation of extensive carbon sequestration projects will be funded at much smaller price tags.
By the Way, not one of these extreme projects lifts the first finger to help eradicate poverty, which is one of the UN's leading goals as well.
HOWEVER, EVEN IF WE COULD AGREE ON FUNDING, WE DO NOT HAVE TIME TO BUILD ...
... AND PUT THEM INTO PLACE WHEN WE HAVE NO IDEA OF THE TRUE MAGNITUDE AND RELIABILITY OF THE PROPOSED PLAN, PLANS, NEW PLANS, FUTURE PLANS AND SO FORTH!
How many trillions of dollars will these solutions take?
Which countries will foot the bill?
Which countries can afford the bill?
What committees are going to approve such projects?
WE HAVE THE SOLUTION ALREADY. This program is ongoing, it helps eradicate poverty when combined with agroforestry, it helps Mother Nature to help herself to get out of this problem that we humans have gotten her into. Why does man think that he can use extreme technology to get us out of a problem that two-man-push-pull handsaws, axes and "low tech" chain saws got us into? If we arm Mother Nature she will do the rest and she works 24/7, but only from the time that we arm her, not before since she is exhausted and needs our help to regain her strength. Oh my, once she is strong again and we step out of her way our grandchildren won't have to move onto the foothills of our mountains to have waterfront property, they will be able to stay right where their parents grew up.
Why does man think that he can continue to use fossil fuels?
Maybe it is because fossil fuels were once touted as "the inexhaustible and inexpensive fuel". In its hay day it was considered high-tech to use it for everything, it seemed. We invented plastics, it went into fertilizers and the entire petrochemical industry grew beyond belief. There is no wonder why the many alternatives available have been ignored. How do you swim against the stream? Complicated and expensive processing became the norm since the actual underground supply was cheap, see we got it from Mother Nature for free, or did we?
Without having to resort to extreme engineering, however, we can revisit the simple ways where it is easy to understand right from wrong. For example. Charcoal, when made improperly from living forest materials is not a positive event. However, when it is made properly from dead organic matter we now have Mother Nature's method of pulling exponential amounts of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and sequestering it in the soil on the floor of the forest. The forest itself benefits from that endeavor and grows bigger, sequestering a portion of that carbon in its wood while the rest remains in the soil for years to come.
The conversion to biofuel from non-food stock biomass is a matter of using a press, a simple press and then either using, selling or bartering the fuel right there in the same neighborhood for the local vehicles. No need to transport the biocrude to the refinery, what refinery? It is processed right in the neighborhood, nothing is wasted and there is no pollution.
We do not need to spend millions and millions on developing pyrolysis and other high-tech, high energy methods. It is now the time to decentralize the highly wasteful manufacturing industries moving the responsibility back to the country side. Through miniaturization the processing will be a neighborhood event and business, green, environmentally friendly and efficient. The list goes on.
Just the pre-feasibility study money for the extreme projects is sufficient to get this program to the replication stage. Oh my, let's move our thinking from the extremes and get back to basics. Is there money in it? Sure and most of it stays at the grassroots level where people were previously poor, but there is plenty more for commerce and those wanting to invest along the way.