Opinions Decreasing greenhouse gases and warming is not enough. Climate solutions must be sustainable in addition to mitigation. Lauren Wilner Geoengineering, a tactic to mitigate climate change, is gaining more and more support. It involves large-scale ways of intervening in the way that Earth works. A couple of ways it does this is by extracting carbon dioxide from the air and lessening the amount of light from the sun that reaches Earth, containing the severity of warming. Those trying to solve the climate crisis, such as scientists and government officials, are turning to geoengineering, not only because it is theorized to help reduce the effects of climate change, but also to serve as a backup plan if the world’s carbon footprint is not reduced enough, though it’s still not an end-all solution. Despite these views in support, geoengineering cannot be prioritized as a climate solution because of the formidable negative effects that come with it. Geoengineering tampers with the natural processes of our planet, and no one can engage in that without risking extreme unintended consequences. Examples of possible consequences of cooling the Earth through decreasing the amount of sunlight, which would not be uniform, include changes in weather patterns and access to food and water. Also, since sulfur particles are used, it could lead to air pollution, acid rain and even the sky turning white. With these possible effects, engaging in geoengineering is comparable to playing God. The risk of making things worse is too great to engage in geoengineering while trying to solve already-happening catastrophes, like hurricanes, flooding and wildfires. Disrupting the planet at this kind of level is the absolute height of hubris and inconsiderate of everyone and everything that calls Earth home. Geoengineering mitigates climate change but does not resolve its source. If geoengineering is […]