How to Cool the Planet by Jeff Goodell

by Jeff Goodell

Right now, a group of scientists is working on ways to minimize the catastrophic impact of global warming. But they’re not designing hybrids or fuel cells or wind turbines. They’re trying to lower the temperature of the entire planet. And they’re doing it with huge contraptions that suck CO2 from the air, machines that brighten clouds and deflect sunlight away from the earth, even artificial volcanoes that spray heat-reflecting particles into the atmosphere.This is the radical and controversial world of geoengineering, which only five years ago was considered to be "fringe." But as Jeff Goodell points out, the economic crisis, combined with global political realities, is making these ideas look sane, even inspired. Goodell himself started out as a skeptic, concerned about tinkering with the planet’s thermostat. We can’t even predict next week’s weather, so how are we going to change the temperature of whole regions? What if a wealthy entrepreneur shoots particles into the stratosphere on his own? Who gets blamed if something goes terribly wrong? And perhaps most disturbing, what about wars waged with climate control as the primary weapon? There are certainly risks, but Goodell believes the alternatives could be worse. In the end, he persuades us that geoengineering may just be our last best hope—a Plan B for the environment. His compelling tale of scientific hubris and technical daring is sure to jump-start the next big debate about the future of life on earth.

Genres: Science, Environment, Nonfiction, Climate Change, Popular Science, Futurism, 21st Century

Paperback Bunko

First published January 1, 2010

About the author

Jeff Goodell’s latest book is The Heat Will Kill You First: Life and Death on a Scorched Planet. He is the author of six previous books, including The Water Will Come: Rising Seas, Sinking Cities, and the Remaking of the Civilized World, which was a New York Times Critics Top Book of 2017. He has covered climate change for more than two decades at Rolling Stone and discussed climate and energy issues on NPR, MSNBC, CNN, CNBC, ABC, NBC, Fox News and The Oprah Winfrey Show. He is a Senior Fellow at the Adrienne Arsht-Rockefeller Foundation Resilience Center and a 2020 Guggenheim Fellow.

Reviews

[Jason · Rating 3 out of 5]

Are you a good citizen? Really? Well, good for you, sunshine. I don't think I'm a good citizen--well, not the best citizen I can be. I mean, I've been in the Air Force for 14 years, and have at least another 6 years at minimum. My salary comes from your taxes. And for that salary I'm happy to deploy to Iraq and Afghanistan, so there's no conscription or mandatory service for you or my kids. My family endures long periods of time without me while I'm overseas, in austere conditions, and in harm's way. But, it's my job; I knew the requirements from the beginning. So does that really count as good citizenry?

No, I mean what's your cause? What do you stand for? What is your bag, baby? There are plenty of ways to be a good citizen: fireman, police officer, grade school teacher, librarian, emergency room doctor, yes, and military officer too. But, how do you volunteer? Isn't that what makes a good citizen? Your hard-earned time for absolutely no remuneration besides your hard earned time? I deploy for months, and I miss my family dearly, but I'm ultimately rewarded by pay.

So. Where do you make your mark? How do you volunteer? When do you march for a cause? Muscular dystrophy; Peace Corps; Big Brother/Big Sister; Veteran's of Foreign Wars; Aegis Students; ACT UP; Tea Party protest; homeless shelter? It doesn't matter where, or how. It simply matters that you do.

Okay, being in the military is a volunteer position. Got it. But I'm trying to drill down to the activity that defines you as an 'unpaid' steward, a voluntary activist, an altruistic measurement, a non-quid-pro-quo position, something that says to the world: I'm taking a stand here for the humane treatment of whales, and I'm going to stick my finger in your chest to keep from drilling in ANWR, and I'll bump noses with you if we don't build a fence along the border, and I won't move from this spot until you recognize the genocide in Darfur; or, simply: I'll stay here all night, Christmas Eve, until everybody in line down the street and around the corner has a warm meal in their belly.

I don't currently volunteer like this. I need to start. Now there's a protocol in the military that prevents me from participating in rallies that have clear political agendas. I'm on phone recall 24/7 (I'm always on duty). But when I'm not raising kids and fixing the house, where do I make my mark? What is my bag, baby? What is your bag, baby?

How to Cool the Planet: Geoengineering and the Audacious Quest to Fix Earth's Climate doesn't have the motivational firepower to make me rally against global warming, volunteer to support Cap and Trade, or sit-in against DuPont and Monsanto. But it has made me decide to begin nosing around and learn more about America's policies regarding the environment. I'm not UNinformed about global warming. Hell, I could probably lead a community college class discussion about the topic, both for and against, both fiscally and monetarily, both globally and locally, both federally and municipally, both at the business and individual level. I read a book last month called Power Trip: From Oil Wells to Solar Cells--Our Ride to the Renewable Future, so my proclamation to 'begin nosing around' is not a cold start point. Instead, I'll begin making the environment the cause that makes me a better citizen. I've got to stand for something. The environment has always been a topic that looms on the periphery for me. I've been aware of the debate, but haven't been engaged. I have opinions, but no firm position.

Warning: this doesn't necessarily make my default position in support of the Kyoto Protocol or the Copenhagen Accord. In fact, I'm just as liable to think Al Gore a goon, and that the recent destruction of ozone results from a global, 20th century meat diet, making cows and their capacity to produce voluminous amounts of methane just as culpable as Bethlehem Steel in reducing ozone. It just means that I'm open to learning more. And that's probably the best objective way to be.

How to Cool the Planet has 2 salient points about geoengineering and global warming. One, the world won't act decisively until there is a clear and present crisis, beyond a political doubt; and two, when we act, it will be as cheaply and quickly as possible. The book then outlines the most likely geoengineering solution to this suddenly overnight, political crisis. The first is to release sulfates into the upper atmosphere, thus blocking solar radiation from reaching the lower atmosphere (a slow-release man-made volcano, if you will). The second is to stimulate cloud production made from much smaller nuclei than natural particles, creating brighter clouds, thus reflecting solar radiation from reaching the surface (a wide-area man-made overcast, if you will). Both of these solutions could use technology available to us today. They can both be implemented cheaply and quickly. They are technologies that have already--in some small experimental ways--been applied and measured in the real world. And, they are both immediately reversible--clouds dissipate, sulfate precipitates.

Twopointsomething rounded up to 3 stars. This is not the best book about global warming. It's not the best book about environmental policy. It's not even the best book about geoengineering. But it is a book that, for whatever reason, brought this topic from languishing on the periphery for me and into the center. This review was written to capture that instance in my history.

[William Liggett · Rating 5 out of 5]

If I were to recommend just one book to learn about the concept of geoengineering and appreciate the scope of what’s involved, it would be Goodell’s. Although it’s not the most current writing, published in 2010, it appears to include most of the interventions to cool the planet that I have come across. The author makes the technical details understandable and, at the same time, weaves in personal stories of the scientists involved. What the author conveys is the urgency and ultimate seriousness of the problem that humanity faces because of our relentless production of greenhouse gases causing heat to be trapped on the surface of the earth.

Goodell highlights the controversies that surround geoengineering. Any time humans try to monkey with something as huge and complex as the climate we are taking a leap into the unknown. For example, scientists have proposed injecting particles of sulfur dioxide into the stratosphere to mimic the cooling effect of volcanic eruptions. But what would this do to patterns of rainfall? Would it produce acid rain or enlarge the ozone hole?

As controversial as geoengineering has become, it is reassuring to know that scientists are working to see what can be done. We are far from knowing the risks and benefits of geoengineering to consider implementing anything now. More research is needed, while we explore ways of reducing our production of greenhouse gases and discover how to pull CO2 from the atmosphere on a scale that would make a difference.

Unfortunately, as the book makes clear, we are heading inexorably toward a situation where geoengineering to cool the planet may be our only hope of maintaining a habitable world. As sobering as this prospect is, reading a book like Goodell’s can help us prepare intellectually, if not emotionally, for what may be coming.

[Nicole · Rating 4 out of 5]

How to Cool the Planet blew my mind with a previously unknown topic: geoengineering. Goodell soberly presents the arguments for and against this cutting edge science, showing clearly that geoengineering is actually nothing new, and that by denying scientists the opportunity to research technologies that could cool the planet, bring rains to dry land, or increase the carbon intake of oceans through phytoplankton blooms, we could be failing to develop the real remedies in a future climate crisis. Is it playing god? Yeah, but since when do we NOT play god? Is it politically, economically, and ethically fraught? Absolutely. But if we don't explore it now, we won't have a clue how it could be deployed or at what cost in the future.

[Mishehu · Rating 4 out of 5]

An entertaining, informative, sobering, balanced read. Less one star on account of some repetitive editorializing. Heady stuff to contemplate. Rather terrifying that we need to seriously consider mass environmental engineering projects like the ones this book describes. Obvious that we do. My proposal: scatter three trillion tons of N.Y. Times confetti (uniformly coating the earth's landmass) and release 2 billion white balloons into the upper atmosphere. (Spread 8 quintillion tons of mayonnaise?). World albedo party 2015...

[Henry · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book getes to grip with the "unthinkable"--geoengineering to cool the globe, using methods such as increasing albedo in clouds or seeding the stratosphere with sulfur oxide, as well as putting iron into the oceans. Some are zany and obviously won't work. A good read, if you want to
know the alternative to global warming. Cutting CO2 emissions to almost nothing won't work.

[Greg Stoll · Rating 4 out of 5]

I came into this book with a set of priors that went something like this:
- Global climate change is happening and it's going to be bad.
- Eventually the economics of green energy (particularly solar) are going to lead to humanity cutting carbon emissions pretty significantly, even if we don't make much extra effort.
- This will take a while and climate change will advance significantly in the meantime.
- Geoengineering (doing something science-y to reduce the sun's heat that hits the earth) can buy us time to reduce our emissions.
- Some people think that geoengineering is a bad idea because it reduces the urgency for humanity to reduce our carbon emissions. This smacks of accelerationism, the left-wing idea that you should hope that capitalism intensifies and leads to the collapse of society so then you can build back a better society.
- To me, accelerationism is hogwash. How do you know you'll be able to build back a better society? And you're taking white a bit of collateral damage in the middle part!
- If we have a chance to reduce the harm climate change is going to do to humanity, I think we should do it.

Honestly I'm a techno-optimist at heart!

After reading the book, I'm still pretty much in this camp. Although I am a bit more worried about the effects of geoengineering that we can't predict, but I think that's an argument to consider approaches like injecting sulfur into the atmosphere, the effects of which will fade away relatively quickly if we decide to stop doing it.

This book was written in 2010, and climate change has gotten worse in the intervening 15 years, and we still haven't done any testing of geoengineering. We should probably do that, soon, if we're serious about this!

Parts of the book I found interesting:

- Even if we cut our CO2 emissions to zero tomorrow, the CO2 we've already put into the atmosphere will remain for a long time. Apparently half of the CO2 we emit gets absorbed into the ocean and trees within 10 years, 30 percent lasts for a few hundred years, and the remaining 20 percent can last as long as 100,000 years! This is why I feel like we're going to have to do something...(pg 9)
- Way back in 2001 the Department of Energy commissioned a report about geoengineering! Sadly it was never published, probably because it would have looked weird to talk about geoengineering without talking about reducing carbon emissions, and this was under the Bush administration. (pg 12)
- In the 1890s, Swedish physicist Svante Arrhenius figured out how CO2 would heat up the earth and even did a pretty accurate estimate (after many months of pen-and-paper calculations) of how much! Since he lived in Sweden, however, he was pretty excited about this since he was tired of the long, cold winters! (pg 48)
- Coincidentally also in the 1890s, Los Angeles had a terrible drought, and the city lost half its population! (this was in a section about "rain-makers" of questionable efficacy) (pg 57)
- The book talks about the Acid Rain Program, which was a cap-and-trade program for sulfur dioxide in the US that started in the 1990s. I had no idea we had a cap-and-trade program! (sadly, the book talks about this in the context of cap-and-trade for carbon :-/ ) (pg 141, 144)
- The book mentions Elon Musk, but since it was written in 2010 it feels the need to explain who he is, and I was like "ugggggh I know who he is" (pg 149)

[Thomas Wikman · Rating 3 out of 5]

Global Warming is a fact. As the famous scientist and founder of the “Gaia Theory”, James Lovelock, points out, it is probably too late to reverse it. One way or another we are going to have to adapt, for example by, abandoning low lying cities, move people around between countries (mass immigration), take special action to preserve as many species as we can, build new networks of high tech irrigation systems, and hope that the specter of catastrophic climate change does not rear its ugly head.

Another option is that of deliberately manipulating the Earth's climate to counteract global warming, or the effects of global warming. It is not as outlandish as it first sounds; after all we are already manipulating the Earth's climate on a massive scale, but unintentionally so. Clearing forests, building cities, agriculture, and polluting the atmosphere, etc, are all various actions, which have a large and mostly negative effect on the climate. When you plant a tree you also manipulate the climate, but in a small way. In fact, large scale tree planting with the intent to counter act global warming is considered geoengineering. Perhaps you could call gardeners small-scale geo-engineers.

In this book, Jeff Goodell, a journalist, explores the various aspects of geoengineering, its promises, dangers, and the political, financial and scientific aspects of geoengineering. He discusses the ideas of several scientists and “Geo-Engineers”, including, Ken Caldeira, Lowell Wood, James Lovelock, David Keith, Stephen Salter, Lowell Wood, and many others, as well as interviews them. He also discusses various rain makers at the beginning of the last century, and Edward Tellers attempts to change the earth’s surface using thermonuclear bombs.

The book describes and discusses several different geoengineering approaches including:

* Direct carbon sequestration techniques, which removes CO2 from the atmosphere and stores it. It is basically like planting a forest, but it is quicker and encapsulated in a container.

* Spraying sulfur aerosols into the stratosphere, especially above the arctic, to reflect sun light and cool the planet. It is basically what volcanic eruptions do, except it is more efficient and less polluting. Since this method will not remove CO2 from atmosphere it does not solve the problem of increasingly acidic oceans as a result of more CO2. It solves just the "warming effect". It could be used in a targeted fashion to prevent the Arctic from melting.

* Iron fertilization of the oceans to cause algal blooms that will effectively sequester carbon dioxide.

* Cloud reflectivity enhancement by using fine sea water sprays to brighten clouds. Just like the method of spraying sulfur aerosols into the stratosphere, this method will not solve the problem of increasingly acidic oceans.

[Timothy Grubbs · Rating 5 out of 5]

An interesting look at the past, present, and potential future of geoengineering in order to save the planet…

How to Cool the Planet: Geoengineering and the Audacious Quest to Fix Earth's Climate by Jeff Goodell is a part scientific expose and part manifesto on what is currently being proposed (at least as of 14 years ago) to deal with climate change.

Geoengineering has been around for a long time…but typically under other names. From irrigation to “rainmaking” to public works projects, mankind has often worked to try and affect the earth to make it more “suitable” for human settlement. Now we just need to focus on how to insure the survival of future generations.

Much of this book will read like pseudoscience, and that’s because it is. A good chapter focuses on a notable rainmaker from the early 20th century and his contemporaries and how they claimed to be able to bring rain with secret experiments such as “seeding the clouds”. Naturally they were all full of bullshit.

Meanwhile other examples exist such as a post wwii program tied to nuking parts of Alaska to make the state more acceptable…something that thankfully was eventually abandoned.

Many of the past examples of Geoengineering were the thoughts of conmen, madmen, or idiots that though they knew what was right. Almost none had any scientific knowledge or training.

Fortunately, modern examples have a bit more credibility. Sure, they may be difficult to implement, but some may eventually be viable. The book goes into a great deal of these such as ocean fertilization, volcanic experiments to lower temperature, and even new technologies to capture carbon.

Unfortunately, many of these ideas also come hand in hand with entrepreneurs anxious to make money…either through wild ideas (raising money for impossible goals), raising carbon credits that can be sold off (even talk of “emissions trading” as a form of stock market), and shady companies seeking any get rich quick scheme to offset their carbon footprint by doing something quick and easy that “counts” the same as planting new trees.

A lot of names are tossed around in the book, some that have become infamous since its publication, don’t might be worth releasing some kind of update covering how things have changed with some of these ideas and companies in the 15 years since.

Still interesting though…

[briz]

DNF @ 27%.

Not gonna bother rating it, but I DNFed it very intentionally and with great gusto - I BANISHED it. Here's why:
- This was published in 2010. Fourteen years later, it felt VERY dated.
- The science felt dated. For example, the author talks about how completely implausible it is that we'll EVER get off coal and this 2022 video by Kurzgesagt discusses just that.
- The examples of EVERYTHING felt cherry-picked. The scientists he spoke with, the historical figures he chose to centralize (rainmakers and Edward Teller).
- The anti-geoengineering arguments felt overstated and strawmanly. Like, I AM very curious about the political economy of geoengineering. But it was hard to wade through all the broey journalist "aaaaaah" noise to find the kernels of ACTUAL argument.
- DID I MENTION HOW BROEY THIS WAS? The straw(s) that broke the proverbial feminist camel's back were a few: (1) first, who he chose to emphasize and centralize the voices of - it just felt so incredibly limited and boring. Like, I just learned that the inventor of the solar desalination still was Maria Telkes - DOUBLE X CHROMOSOME COMIN AT YA. But, here, no. It's just a history of great men. (2) Next, he makes several off-hand broey jokes like, "Mother Nature was showing some serious leg" (to signify that it was a beautiful day) and how Great Man Scientist X spent his youth "shagging nurses" and was "refreshingly candid about sex" and I was just like, ya know... this is obnoxious. And finally, (3) I kinda already stated this, but I feel like this interaction between presenting geoengineering as another example of Great Men of History guiding history was just so boring and reductive and not actually informative.

Soooo. Yeah. If anyone knows any more recent books, with updated climate science and with a less simplified and more political economy-minded portrayal of the pros and cons, HIT ME UP.

[Malin Friess · Rating 5 out of 5]

What if we have a climate emergency and the temperature rises by 15 degrees? What if the changes we are making to curb carbon emisssions and cut down on fossil fuels now is already too late? What if the ocean is already warmed and the amount of Co2 in the atmosphere and the damage is already done. Going vegetarian, driving Tesla's and recycling may not be enough?
We need to consider geoengineering (a taboo topic) which would be better called climate restoration or climate resetting. What if we could brighten clouds so they would reflect more sunlight? What if we could have huge machines that would suck CO2 out of the atmosphere? And perhaps the most promising..what if we could spray tiny heat reflecting particle into the atmosphere above the polar ice sheets that would reflect heat.
The truth is we can't even predict the weather tomorrow (My kids are out of school at noon because of fear of snow and it's 44 degrees out and dry) do how can we predict the severity of climate change in 20, 50, 100 years?
Let's unleash our best technology and smartest minds and consider geoengineering on a small scale and see if it works.

[NCHS Library]

Publisher's Description: Climate discussions often focus on potential impacts over a long period of time--several decades, a century even. But change could also happen much more suddenly. What if we had a real climate emergency--how could we cool the planet in a hurry? This question has led a group of scientists to pursue extreme solutions: huge contraptions that would suck CO2 from the air, machines that brighten clouds and deflect sunlight away from the earth, even artificial volcanoes that spray heat-reflecting particles into the atmosphere. This is the radical and controversial world of geoengineering. How to Cool the Planet, Jeff Goodell explores the scientific, political, and moral aspects of geoengineering. How are we going to change the temperature of whole regions if we can't even predict next week's weather? What about wars waged with climate control as the primary weapon? There are certainly risks, but Goodell persuades us that geoengineering may be our last best hope, a Plan B for the environment. And if it is, we need to know enough to get it right.

[M Burke · Rating 5 out of 5]

Outstanding summary of the potential benefits and risks of some of the most common geoengineering ideas—injecting particles into the upper atmosphere or clouds to reflect sunlight and fertilizing ocean plants to capture carbon. While there are plenty of interesting technical details, much of the book focuses on the ethical dilemmas surrounding geoengineering (and climate change more broadly) and the intersection of science with politics. It includes great profiles of scientists and entrepreneurs—sometimes endearing, sometimes scathing—and their journeys developing specific technologies.

The book makes clear that reducing emissions should be our first priority, but that respected scientists support further research into geoengineering to better understand the consequences and side effects of particular technologies, because we will either be desperate enough to need them or a rogue individual or country will deploy them anyway.

This book provides an optimistic counterpoint to The Uninhabitable Earth (which is also excellent but bleak).

[Bryan Alexander · Rating 4 out of 5]

A good introduction to geoengineering. Goodell walks us through the overall topics, then explores a range of methods and projects.

Throughout he engages with the controversies over geoengineering. Ultimately he tries to synthesize opposing sides, or rather to come down in a middle ground.

One problem: the book is dated, being from 2010. The topic is still germane, the projects are still in the air, and the debates are live.

[Craig Evans · Rating 5 out of 5]

A quite interesting journalistic, investigative reporting piece of work. From the history of both ancient and modern culture's endeavours to modify its surroundings, to today's burgeoning endeavors to ameliorate the real and potential damage being done to our biosphere, the author puts forth a straight-forward essay on the risks and benefits of action and non-action.

[Mark · Rating 4 out of 5]

Well researched book into the possibilities that are currently being explored to influence the climate on a global scale.

Easy to read and understand for those of us that aren't experts in the field.

[Nathan Hoyt · Rating 4 out of 5]

I found this to be a good review of the possible ways to combat global warming. This includes the practicality of each - including the negative aspects. I did realize only after reading it that it was a few years old, but still worth the read.

[Bob · Rating 5 out of 5]

First popular book on Geo engineering. Very much ahead of our times. Comes at it from a very factual way likely to bother ideologues.

[Arjun]

Bookmarks in comments

[Peter Slenning · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is a good book to understand our influence on nature,and what we can do to improve our living practices. This reading does make me regret some of my past practices in living. This book has explained the complications of geoenginering. I also feel like I understand more about future heatwave. I learned that I actually am adapting to self efforts by tree plantings and keeping my yard cooler. Ideas about white roofs on houses already being used in different places around the globe. This book is a little worry about a nuclear storm. Overall this book is enlightening of what we might expect in the future. I worry about what our kids can expect.

[Matt · Rating 4 out of 5]

A really good primer on the bizarro, but increasingly relevant world of geoengineering. Through methods such as cloud seeding, particle injection into the stratosphere, and iron fertilization of the ocean, geoengineering represents the technical, god-complex approach to cooling the climate. A few years ago these technologies were largely written off as the sole realm of fringe scientists and industries willing to consider any temperature-reduction scheme other than actually reducing emissions. However, given the level of political inaction around climate change, and the increasingly severe impacts, the mainstream is beginning to latch onto geoengineering as a Plan B worthy of serious consideration.

I think Goodell does a good job of describing these technologies, the characters behind their development, and the truly scary proposition of actually deploying them, psychologically and environmentally. He's also fairly convincing of the need for further government-sponsored research to better understand which ones could actually help prevent catastrophe, or at least buy us some time, if the need arises, and Plan A is no longer an option.

Some excerpts...
"Every time you drive to the store for a quart of milk, about 50% of the CO2 you dump out of the tailpipe remains in the atmosphere for a decade or so before it is absorbed by the earth's carbon cycle. (The oceans are the single largest carbon-eaters, but plants and trees suck up a lot, too.) It takes a few centuries to absorb the next 30%. The final 20% lingers in the atmosphere for as long as 100,000 years." (p. 9)

"Lovelock believes that most scientists, politicians, and environmentalists have failed to grasp - much less prepare us for - the urgency and consequences of global warming. Some of this failure is just plain ignorance. Some of it is due to misplaced faith in computer models as reliable guides to future climate change. Some of it is due to a Christian faith that God will take care of us. Some of it is greed. And some of it is simply cowardice, or a fear of being proved wrong." (p.92)

"The real wild card, in Caldeira's view, is how we humans would respond to a geoengineered world. Putting particles in the atmosphere is likely to cause sunlight to become more diffuse, blurring the sharp lines of shadows and turning the sky whiter during the day, while making sunsets redder in the evening. How do you calculate the psychological impact of that? It's not just the end of blue skies as a physical reality but also the end of blue skies as a metaphor - that suggestion of the great beauty and power of nature, of a promising day ahead, of cosmic beneficence. Instead of a sky above us, it would be a ceiling." (p.134)

"The simple truth is, we have crossed over an important dividing line that separates us from all the billions of people who came before us. We may not be morally more sophisticated or smarter or better artists or bolder scientists or more loving parents, but we do have one thing that no civilization before us has ever had: we have the power to intentionally change the climate on the planet we live on. We might do it badly, we might do it well; we might do it quickly, we might do it slowly. But we can do it. What matters now is the human part of the equation." (p. 193)

[Riku Sayuj]

Geo-Engineering or Cosmic Protectionism

“We are capable of shutting off the sun and the stars because they do not pay a dividend.”

~ John Maynard Keynes, 1933


We must recognize the limits to protectionism, especially when applied to protect rival goods against competition from non-rival goods.

Frédéric Bastiat’s classic satire, “Petition of the Candlemakers Against the Sun”, is given new relevance by demands for Geoengineering.

Written in 1845 in defense of free trade and against national protectionism in France, it can now be applied to the cosmic protectionists who want to protect the global fossil fuel-based growth economy against “unfair” competition from sunlight — a free good.

The free flow of solar radiation that powers life on earth should perhaps be diminished, suggest some, including American Enterprise Institute’s S. Thernstrom (Washington Post 6/13/09, p. A15), because it threatens the growth of our candle-making economy that requires filling the atmosphere with heat-trapping gasses. The protectionist “solution” of partially turning off the sun (by albedo-increasing particulate pollution of the atmosphere) will indeed make thermal room for more carbon-burning candles. Although this will likely increase GDP and employment, it is attended by the inconvenient fact that all life is pre-adapted by millions of years of evolution to the existing flow of solar energy.

Reducing that flow cancels these adaptations wholesale — just as global warming cancels myriad existing adaptations to temperature.

Artificially reducing our most basic and abundant source of low entropy in order to burn up our scarcer terrestrial source more rapidly is contrary to the interests both of our species and of life in general.

Add to that the fact that “candles”, and many other components of GDP, are at the margin increasingly unneeded and expensive, requiring aggressive advertising and Ponzi-style debt financing in order to be sold, and one must conclude that “geo-engineering” the world for more candles and less photosynthesis is an even worse idea than credit default swaps.

Why then do some important people advocate geo-engineering? As the lesser evil compared to absolutely catastrophic and imminent climate disaster, they say. If American Enterprise Institute has now stopped offering scientists money to write papers disputing global warming, and in fact has come around to the view that climate change is bad, then why have they not advocated carbon taxes or cap and trade limits? Because they think the technical geo-fix is cheap and will allow us to buy time and growth to better solve the problem in the future.

Just one more double whiskey to help us get our courage up enough to really face our addiction. . . .

~ Taken from Herman E. Daly's Ecological Economics: Principles And Applications

[Srivas · Rating 3 out of 5]

A provocative book, ably explores the myriad issues surrounding planetary climate geoengineering. Goodell quickly surveys various options for capturing carbon (his take: likely to be fairly slow) and reducing sunlight absorption, and concludes that these options are extremely powerful, extremely uncertain in their impact, and extremely cheap - we're talking cheap enough for individual billionaires to pull off. Given this context it is natural for him to spend much time thinking about social, cultural, ethical and political ramifications. To his credit, in doing this Goodell doesn't waste too much time bloviating in an inexpert and unfocused manner about "hubris" or "mother nature" and such, though he is careful to flag such concerns and note how they will strongly sculpt the political debate. His focus rather is on more down-to-earth concerns like rogue nations or individuals, the red queen race problem, moral hazards, geopolitical context and military involvement. He concludes as he starts, hoping that such geoengineering will never be necessary, but also that we have the ability in our pockets just in case abrupt or worse than expected climate change makes it necessary.

I found myself skimming in spots, since Goodell has resorted to the trick of padding out chapters with descriptions of the facial features, biographies and mannerisms of most of the scientists and entrepreneurs who make an appearance, not to mention landscape word-painting that is needlessly elaborated. Such descriptions in large part add little besides heft to the book. No doubt someone told him a 140-150 page book would be too slim, and that he had to add another 80 pages to arrive at the minimum possible publishable length. Nevertheless, the book is a fun read, and the meat can be extracted in a few hours.

[Paul Childs · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book is kinda interesting. The geo-engineering technologies are described in some detail as well as some of the scientists behind the ideas.

The author seems to be enamored with some of the technological solutions, but is still objective enough in order to see that there are a lot of negatives or unknowns that accompany each idea.

The biggest questions about this book and the technologies is are we too late to prevent the worst of global warning or can we still realistically cut back in time to avoid catastrophic damage to our society through emission cuts alone. If you believe we are too late than this book would hold some possible solutions. If we are not, then trying these ideas would probably make you uncomfortable.

The author also talks about political and ethical ramifications of a lone country or a group of countries making the decision to save the climate on their own.

[Dean · Rating 4 out of 5]

We're in trouble. Mr. Goodell, a smart man, a rational man, has written three major books on the climate crisis: "How to Cool the Planet," together with "The Water Will Come" and "The Heat Will Kill You First." They're all well written and researched, and they all reflect his conclusion that it's too late to reverse climate change's pernicious effects by significantly reducing the amount of CO2 emitted into the atmosphere. It's too late. Geo-engineering, which works, so we may hope, by adding enough particulate matter into the skies to reduce the amount of sunlight and keep temperatures in check, is the subject of "How to Cool the Planet," his first book. It's a good, if unnerving, read.

My perspective on this topic has also been shaped by "Learning How to Die in the Anthropocene," Roy Scranton, and "What If We Stopped Pretending the Climate Apocalypse Can Be Stopped?" by Jonathan Franzen. We behold a scary future. Alas, nature doesn't care about us.

[Jim · Rating 5 out of 5]

Goodell tells the tales of scientists and entrepreneurs who think they can fix the climate by engineering the Earth system itself. One of them, Ken Caldiera, was my office mate at the Penn State Earth System Science Center. I can hear Ken's words throughout Goodell's reporting. Some fascinating ideas are on display in this book. It allows me to appreciate truly big ideas which aren't in the field of Information Technology. "How to Cool the Planet" is a great read.

[Adam McPhee · Rating 3 out of 5]

A good overview of the subject. Looks at interesting projects in the field such as a carbon sequestering device (built at the university of Calgary), a rogue attempt at ocean fertilization, and attempts to manipulate Earth's albedo via cloud brightening. Sidetrips into 19th century rainmakers and contemporary chemtrail conspiracists seem a bit tangential. I don't think any of it is going to work, though.

[Linda · Rating 4 out of 5]

Goodell explores the science, politics, financial and moral aspects of geoengineering as a way to cool the planet - as well as making the reader aware that our attempts to cut CO2 may not be too little too late. A must read for everyone concerned about life on our planet!

[Jeppe Haarsted · Rating 4 out of 5]

Good introduction to the topic of geoengineering. Briefly describes the main technologies but this is basically a book about the ethical and moral concerns about geoengineering. Makes a good argument for why we cannot simply dismiss geoengineering but must understand the science better - fast.

[Art]

recommended by Marsha/booklist online

[Kshappert]

Sobering read....geoengineering is starting to gain momentum as we must consider far reaching opportunities to reverse global warming