Also, I am suspicious of framing “opposition to geoengineering” as bad—this, to me, is a red flag that someone has not done their homework on uncertainties in the responses of the climate system to large-scale interventions like albedo modification. Geoengineering the planet wrong is absolutely an X-risk.
While I can definitely buy that geoengineering is a net-negative, I’m not sure how geoengineering gone wrong can actually result in X-risk, at least to me so far, and I don’t currently understand the issues that well.
It doesn’t speak well that he frames opposition to geoengineering as automatically bad (even if I assume the current arguments against geoengineering are quite bad).
To respond to a local point here:
While I can definitely buy that geoengineering is a net-negative, I’m not sure how geoengineering gone wrong can actually result in X-risk, at least to me so far, and I don’t currently understand the issues that well.
It doesn’t speak well that he frames opposition to geoengineering as automatically bad (even if I assume the current arguments against geoengineering are quite bad).