[1] https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S000632071...
> However, it is likely that insect extinctions since the industrial era are around 5 to 10%, i.e. 250,000 to 500,000 species, based on estimates of 7% extinctions for land snails (Régnier et al., 2015). In total at least one million species are facing extinction in the coming decades, half of them being insects (IPBES, 2019).
You are talking about geoengineering.
It would be way better not to have to do such things in the first place. This is like "meh, sooner or later we'll be able to grow entire organs, you can keep smoking". Sure. But is that day coming soon enough? And what are the drawbacks of such a large intervention?
Besides, species are going extinct every day. We can't get them back.
Our ability to change the earth grows every year
Technologically, we get closer to the ability to fix it.
BUT the fact that this kind of collapse keeps re-occurring means that humans are turning out to be collectively too stupid to actually fix such things until after a disaster happens.
The Tragedy Of The Commons has been known about for centuries. Yet it keeps happening again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, [ . . . ] etc., including in this very instance.
All humans need to do is adjust to the reality. Yet the fact that some of the adjustments will mean that some of the people will need to change how they make a living, causes too many humans to argue vociferously that the change will be delayed. Humans even start wars over this kind of stupidity. And then, THE EARTH SYSTEM COLLAPSES, and forces everyone to make the change.
The only question now is how big a disaster will happen and how recoverable it is. If we are lucky, the disaster will be just in the sweet spot of [bad enough to force the stupid mass of humanity to change it's ways], but not quite [bad enough that it cannot be recovered once those ways are changed].
English has a perfectly cromulent singular neutral, no need for that.
I think that as areas achieve a certain level of plenty, their focus shifts from shorter-term thinking to longer-term thinking. And most places around the world are reaching that tipping point.