I think it’s time to act, not wait for a “climate emergency.” An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.
Wikipedia: Climate engineering/Geoengineering: Public perception
A large 2018 study investigated public perceptions of six climate engineering methods, with an online survey in the United States, United Kingdom, Australia, and New Zealand.[51] The findings were also compared against similar 2012 survey in Australia and New Zealand.[52] Public awareness of climate engineering was low with less than a fifth of respondents reporting prior knowledge. Perceptions of the six climate engineering methods were largely negative and frequently associated with attributes like 'risky', 'artificial' and 'unknown effects'. Carbon dioxide removal methods were preferred over solar geoengineering. Public perceptions were remarkably stable with only minor differences between the different countries in the 2018 and 2012 surveys.[51][52]
In a 2017 focus group study conducted by the Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences (CIRES) in the United States, Japan, New Zealand, and Sweden, participants were asked about carbon sequestration options, reflection proposals such as with space mirrors, or brightening of clouds, and their majority responses could be summed up as follows:
What happens if the technologies backfire with unintended consequences?
Are these solutions treating the symptoms of climate change rather than the cause?
Shouldn't we just change our lifestyle and consumption patterns to fight climate change, making climate engineering a last resort?
Isn't there a greater need to address political solutions to reduce our emissions?
Moderators floated then the idea of a future "climate emergency" such as rapid environmental change. The participants felt that mitigation and adaptation to climate change were strongly preferred options in such a situation, and climate engineering was seen as a last resort.
