We could put the earth into an ice age for under 1% of global GDP. Discussing geo-engineering is generally seen as a moral hazard, though, so western commentators act like no such possibility exists.
The real threat is ecosystem collapse.
Maybe not the most optimistic crowd, though :)
> We could put the earth into an ice age for under 1% of global GDP. Discussing geo-engineering is generally seen as a moral hazard, though, so western commentators act like no such possibility exists.
Yes it exists, but taking this road is the same road that took is to the point where we are right now. I am not very certain it will help at all.
That said, sulfate aerosols are one of the oldest proposed plans and our technology has advanced considerably since then. Perhaps some people working on or funding work on a better solution are on reading this thread.
I sure hope someone is quietly tackling it because the political efforts around CO2 emmissions agreements of the past 50 years are not working very well despite a great deal of activism.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marine_cloud_brightening#Costs
It's something that does not cause acidification, and seems to be very easy to start or interrupt if a problem arises. It's also toward economical gains, as it can be done around ocean farming to increase yelds.
That said, if you try googling geo-engineering and climate change for a few minutes, you'll almost certainly find some of the techniques people have evaluated, their trade-offs and how the issue of moral hazard adds a cost to discussing them.