This is the first post of my new blog, looking at the commercial opportunities arising from the nascent science of geoengineering. This is a term which encompasses a broad set of techniques for changing the earth's climate or surface, by means of large-scale interventions. Options under consideration range from changing the reflectivity of deserts, to "seeding" the atmosphere with clouds or chemicals to reflect more sunlight. It could involve extracting and storing carbon dioxide directly, or numerous other proposed solutions.
As at 2009, the area of geoengineering remains highly controversial - but it is finally being acknowledged as a "Plan B" for mitigating climate change if other approaches fail to work sufficiently. Some people are worried that its discussion might discourage people from making tough decisions about emissions or behaviour - while others see it as a technical solution to permit continued evolution of current lifestyles.
This blog is primarily looking at the commercial opportunities that may at some point arise from geoengineering - which options will succeed, and who might make money from them. There are plenty of other good sources about the science and politics of geoengineering, which will be referenced where relevant, but my own analysis here will focus more on the companies and business models.
As a starting point, I would like to highlight the Royal Society's recent overview of Geoengineering as a very worthwhile resource.
About the Author (Dean Bubley). As a brief background, my current "day job" is a technology analyst and consultant for the telecoms industry, especially mobile & wireless networks, phones and services. My main work blog Disruptive Wireless is here and my company, Disruptive Analysis, is found here. I have long had a general interest in the broader aspects of science and technology, from environmental issues, through computing, physics and on to neurology and biogerontology.
A caveat: my general personal bias is towards technology-led solutions to environmental problems. I am generally of the belief that many environmentalists take a misanthropic stance, while I prefer to believe that humanity is both capable of solving problems, and has a destiny involving continued economic and technological development. I am particularly negative about attempts at "behavioural change" which are often thinly-veiled attempts to impose specific ideologies.
I am generally a believer in anthropogenic climate change - although I'm a little perturbed by the inability of climate models to show the recent falls in temperature. I strongly feel that computing and other areas of technology should be "ringfenced" from the effects of much environmental legislation, as whatever the situation, it is clear that more & faster computers, and better networks, will be essential to model the climate, collect data via sensors, control energy use via "smart grids" and so forth. It is critical that misguided laws do not limit the IT industry's ability to innovate & help solve environmental problems - that would be catastrophically self-defeating.
As at 2009, the area of geoengineering remains highly controversial - but it is finally being acknowledged as a "Plan B" for mitigating climate change if other approaches fail to work sufficiently. Some people are worried that its discussion might discourage people from making tough decisions about emissions or behaviour - while others see it as a technical solution to permit continued evolution of current lifestyles.
This blog is primarily looking at the commercial opportunities that may at some point arise from geoengineering - which options will succeed, and who might make money from them. There are plenty of other good sources about the science and politics of geoengineering, which will be referenced where relevant, but my own analysis here will focus more on the companies and business models.
As a starting point, I would like to highlight the Royal Society's recent overview of Geoengineering as a very worthwhile resource.
About the Author (Dean Bubley). As a brief background, my current "day job" is a technology analyst and consultant for the telecoms industry, especially mobile & wireless networks, phones and services. My main work blog Disruptive Wireless is here and my company, Disruptive Analysis, is found here. I have long had a general interest in the broader aspects of science and technology, from environmental issues, through computing, physics and on to neurology and biogerontology.
A caveat: my general personal bias is towards technology-led solutions to environmental problems. I am generally of the belief that many environmentalists take a misanthropic stance, while I prefer to believe that humanity is both capable of solving problems, and has a destiny involving continued economic and technological development. I am particularly negative about attempts at "behavioural change" which are often thinly-veiled attempts to impose specific ideologies.
I am generally a believer in anthropogenic climate change - although I'm a little perturbed by the inability of climate models to show the recent falls in temperature. I strongly feel that computing and other areas of technology should be "ringfenced" from the effects of much environmental legislation, as whatever the situation, it is clear that more & faster computers, and better networks, will be essential to model the climate, collect data via sensors, control energy use via "smart grids" and so forth. It is critical that misguided laws do not limit the IT industry's ability to innovate & help solve environmental problems - that would be catastrophically self-defeating.
