The sudden interest in geoengineering has come about because many view it as a great way to fix climate change while combating political policies and maintaining a somewhat normal way of life for most citizens. As many in America are aware of, people prefer convenience to active change. It also provides a way to divert focus away from why climate change is caused to what needs to be done. I would say geoengineering is a techno-fix because it could potentially cause more harm than good. As mentioned in the video and in the Hamilton paper, this techno-fix arises from the fact that governments are unwilling to change themselves and social expectations. Rather than dealing with climate change head-on, it’s easier to just release particles in the air to absorb carbon emissions to appeal to both those who are environmentalists and those who benefit off of carbon emissions. In the end, this method can actually cause more harm to the environment.
Geoengineering I believe isn’t that viable of a solution for climate change because it doesn’t help reduce with the cutting of emissions. According to the Keith article, the vast majority of those who support this solution openly oppose cutting emissions. The research done for this solution is mostly in favor of companies that benefit off of the burning of fossil fuels while seeming like they are on the side of the people. In the end, profit is what’s driving the push for research into solar geoengineering, not the desire to slow down carbon emissions.