Home
Categories
EXPLORE
True Crime
Comedy
Business
Society & Culture
History
Sports
Health & Fitness
About Us
Contact Us
Copyright
© 2024 PodJoint
00:00 / 00:00
Sign in

or

Don't have an account?
Sign up
Forgot password
https://is1-ssl.mzstatic.com/image/thumb/Podcasts116/v4/e9/46/1b/e9461b5b-21e6-b7ef-f722-2965258d4caa/mza_14945636862357042797.jpg/600x600bb.jpg
Reviewer 2 does geoengineering
Andrew Lockley
219 episodes
5 days ago
Reviewer 2 quibbles with actual experts in Solar Radiation Modification and Carbon Dioxide Removal, before rejecting their work on spurious, spiteful and capricious grounds. You'd expect nothing less from R2.
Show more...
Technology
RSS
All content for Reviewer 2 does geoengineering is the property of Andrew Lockley and is served directly from their servers with no modification, redirects, or rehosting. The podcast is not affiliated with or endorsed by Podjoint in any way.
Reviewer 2 quibbles with actual experts in Solar Radiation Modification and Carbon Dioxide Removal, before rejecting their work on spurious, spiteful and capricious grounds. You'd expect nothing less from R2.
Show more...
Technology
https://d3t3ozftmdmh3i.cloudfront.net/production/podcast_uploaded_nologo/8385484/8385484-1644436279296-bd6cad2241991.jpg
More Moore - polar SRM research
Reviewer 2 does geoengineering
56 minutes 12 seconds
1 month ago
More Moore - polar SRM research

John Moore joins the podcast to discuss his recent Viewpoint article responding to Siegert et al.’s paper on polar geoengineering. While Siegert and colleagues argue that proposed interventions are infeasible, environmentally dangerous, and a distraction from decarbonization, Moore contrasts the prevailing “consequences-based paradigm” (raising alarms to spur actions) with a new “compassionate harm reduction paradigm” that calls for exploring all potential tools including geoengineering rather than rejecting them outright, so humanity has options to reduce harm if warming overshoots.


The conversation covers the risks of melting glaciers and sea-level rise, and specific concepts such as stratospheric aerosol injection. Moore also stresses the importance of Arctic Indigenous leadership, pointing to Saami Council-led review processes as a model for rights-based and knowledge co-produced governance.


The discussion also highlights the sharp divides in the climate community over polar geoengineering and raises fundamental questions about the responsibilities of scientists in an era of accelerating climate risk.


Papers:


Lead Article: Siegert, M., Sevestre, H., Bentley, M. J., Brigham-Grette, J., Burgess, H., Buzzard, S., ... & Truffer, M. (2025). Safeguarding the polar regions from dangerous geoengineering: a critical assessment of proposed concepts and future prospects. Frontiers in Science, 3, 1527393. https://doi.org/10.3389/fsci.2025.1527393


Viewpoint: Moore, J. C., Macias-Fauria, M., & Wolovick, M. (2025). A new paradigm from the Arctic. Frontiers in Science, 3, 1657323. https://doi.org/10.3389/fsci.2025.1657323

Reviewer 2 does geoengineering
Reviewer 2 quibbles with actual experts in Solar Radiation Modification and Carbon Dioxide Removal, before rejecting their work on spurious, spiteful and capricious grounds. You'd expect nothing less from R2.