The global geoengineering

This article is the continuation of the article:
Cool Earth to fight against global warming

To learn more and discuss: cool earth against global warming and climate change with global geoengineering: fiction or reality?

Global geoengineering or climate manipulation on a planetary scale

“The current climate policy seems not to be working. We're not saying we've got the magic wand, but it's a hopeless situation and people should start thinking about unconventional ways. Large-scale preventive projects are needed ”.

PR John Schellnhuber, Head of Britain's Leading Group of Climate Scientists, cited in The Guardian January 11, 2004. Emphasis is placed on us.

Calls for the use of artificial climate modification technologies have been increasing for several years. For example, James Hansen believes that “We need to stabilize CO2 emissions in less than ten years, otherwise temperatures will rise by more than one degree. They will be higher than those we have known for five hundred thousand years, and much can no longer be stopped. If we want to avoid this, we must immediately implement new technologies (…) We have little time left to act ”(emphasis added). PR Schellhuber believes that geoengineering offers much more realistic, more efficient and less expensive options than the measures set by the Kyoto Protocol.

As early as 1997, in an article in the Wall Street Journal, Edward Teller, one of the most ardent defenders of the "Star Wars" project (and the inspiration for the character of Stanley Kubrick's "Doctor Strange"), advocated using the great means to cool the planet. Its "Manhattan Project for the Planet" is to create a huge shield around the earth to deflect the sun's rays to stabilize the climate. This giant sunscreen would cost less than a billion dollars a year - less than the measures imposed by the Kyoto Protocol. According to Teller's calculations, one million tonnes of aluminum and sulfur particles would reduce Earth's insolation by 1%, thus counteracting the greenhouse effect. Russian climatologists from the Institute of World Climate and Ecology advocate similar measures.

These ideas, already old, have been reactivated by the results of studies on the consequences of large volcanic eruptions like those of El Chichon in 1982: the particles of sulfur dioxide (SO2) spewed by volcanoes into the atmosphere cause a significant drop the earth's temperature for a few weeks or even years. For example, the Pinatubo eruption (Indonesia, 1991) lowered ground temperatures by about 0,5 ° C on average for several months. This actually corresponded to significant colds in some regions, and warming in others, such as northern Europe. In 1992, the American National Academy of Sciences considered in an article to use airliners to combat global warming (“Policy implications of Greenhouse Mitigation, Adaptation and the Science Base”).

The use of geoengineering is the way to allow developed countries not to change anything in their way of life. This is what Colin Powell implied during the 2002 Development Summit, during which he reiterated the United States' refusal to ratify the Kyoto protocol. He then revealed that the United States was engaged "in actions to meet environmental challenges, including global climate change, and not just in rhetoric", specifying that they already had "billions of dollars in technologies state-of-the-art ”much more effective than the measures recommended by this protocol2. The American National Center for Atmospheric Research also believes that the most effective means of reducing global warming is the spraying by airplanes of aerosol compounds (particles suspended in the air) reflecting part of the solar rays. in the air.

Read also:  Energy transition: Portugal supplied for 4 days entirely with renewable electricity!

The geoengineering market is a very promising market. All the more so as the Stern report (October 2006) commissioned by the British Chancellor of the Exchequer, announced an economic recession "of catastrophic magnitude" if nothing was rapidly initiated on a planetary scale against the effect of greenhouse: the global gross domestic product (GDP) could fall by 5 to 20% by 2100, resulting in a cost exceeding 5 trillion euros.

Roger Higman of Greenpeace, who agrees with other specialists that "climate change represents the greatest environmental threat we have to face", thinks that technological solutions should not be used as an excuse for having failed in reducing gas emissions. greenhouse effect.

The Risks of Applying These Projects to the Climate System and the Health of Living Beings

Hervé le Treut, research director at CNRS, fears that "aerosols modify our world", and reminds that they generate acid rain. The climate system is very complex and very fragile; In particular, it involves the atmosphere, the oceans, the continents and the biosphere, via chemical, biological and physical processes. The use of aerosol injection would disrupt "a natural phenomenon called arctic oscillation, which would cause local warming in winter in some areas, cooling concentrating in others." is worried for his part the climatologist Edouard Bard, PR at the Collège de France, who adds that with "such global geoengineering devices, it is not only the atmosphere that is at stake, but the climate system in its together, that is to say a gigantic game of dominoes of great complexity. Predicting and evaluating collateral effects on a global scale requires, above all, considerable scientific work involving climatologists, oceanographers, geologists, astronomers, biologists, agronomists, etc. »(Le Monde, October 30, 2006). These manipulations are not subject to any legislation in most countries.

According to NASA, aluminum trimethylene and barium, a metal which has the property of absorbing carbon dioxide (CO2), are among the most widely used chemicals. The toxicity of aluminum is recognized today as a factor favoring the onset of Alzheimer's disease. Henri Pezerat, eminent toxicologist, director of research at CNRS reports that several epidemiological studies carried out in six different countries have all concluded "to a notable increase in the incidence of Alzheimer's disease in relation to too high a concentration in water. of drink ”(this relationship is denied by the French Institute for Public Health Surveillance, which refuses to take into account the risks associated with this metal during water treatment).

Barium is a dangerous element. Barium salts enter the body through the lungs and orally. Insoluble salts inhaled can settle and accumulate in the lungs as a result of long-term exposure. Water soluble salts and acids are very toxic when ingested. Barium causes arrhythmias, digestive disorders, severe asthenia and high blood pressure. Barium analyzes are very delicate and expensive. Tests carried out in Canada have revealed the presence of this metal at abnormally high levels in rainwater.

In general, the increase in aerosols suspended in the air, of various origins, could contribute to the multiplication of cases of respiratory diseases, allergies, eye irritation, migraines, flu-like symptoms without fever, memory loss and confusion, insomnia and depression. The depressive symptoms due to the decrease in luminosity are increasingly treated by light therapy, practiced until now only in the Nordic countries in winter.

Are experiments already underway?

In recent years, a controversy has raged on the Internet, about secret experiments that have already been carried out for more than a decade to mitigate global warming. The supporters of the theory of climate manipulation justify their point of view by observations around the world, for about a decade, of long persistent white traces left by planes crisscrossing the sky. The authorities questioned replied that these plots are only “contrails” (abbreviation for “condensation plots”) corresponding to the water vapor emitted by airplanes at very high altitude, which turns into ice crystals at altitudes. where the air temperature is below -40 ° C. They also insist on the increasing intensification of air traffic.

The proponents of the theory of “chemtrails” (“chemical traces”) reply that contrails disappear after a few minutes, while “chemtrails” can persist for hours; they gradually widen to form a milky veil, before being superimposed and metamorphosed into increasingly thick and dark clouds, which end up forming a leaden blanket above our heads between 24 and 36 h after these spreading. They claim that many planes leaving persistent traces fly at altitudes far too low for contrails to form, that they often fly outside air lanes, and sometimes have abnormal trajectories (such as 90 ° turns). . In North America, associations fighting against "chemtrails" and some personalities vigorously denounce these practices and their dangerousness, sometimes before retracting, like the left-wing Democratic American Senator Denis Kuccinich.

Whether or not experiments have already started, the great hype about global warming, which has been intensifying for several years at the global level, could prepare the minds for the inevitability of resorting to geoengineering. Thus, in March 2005, the American Senate voted in "fast track" a law formalizing climatic manipulations (US Senate Bill 517, and US House Bill 2995).

Military applications of géoingénerie

Like all new technologies (biotechnologies, nanotechnologies, etc.), geoengineering is closely linked to the military sector. As early as 1970, White House security adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski had predicted in his book “Between two ages” that “technology will give the leaders of the main powers the means to conduct secret wars mobilizing a minimum of security forces”. Thus, “climate modification techniques can be used to produce prolonged periods of drought or storm”. In 1977, when the Americans spent $ 2,8 million per year on military research on climate change, the United Nations voted the "ENMOD convention which bans these techniques for" hostile "purposes (France and China do not are among the ninety signatories);

Read also:  The return of Coal

However, neither the United States, which ratified the treaty in 1978, nor the Soviet Union ever ceased their research, while other countries like China in turn developed it. A 1996 report commissioned by the Air Force shows that the United States plans to have full control over the weather in 2025 ("Weather as a Force Reducer: Controlling Weather in 2025) 3. PR Chossudovsky, from the University of Ottawa (Canada), asserts, in a series of articles published on his site, that climate change is not due to greenhouse gases (GHGs) alone, but also to manipulations carried out by the American army from its base in Gacona (Alaska). According to him, it is indeed easy to blame the damage due to these clandestine military experiments on the account of GHGs alone. In February 1998, the European Parliament's Committee on Foreign Affairs, Security and Defense Policy held a series of hearings in Brussels on the possible harmful effects on the environment of the manipulations carried out by this center. She deplored the refusal of the American administration to answer her questions, without going further, in order to avoid creating tensions with Washington4.

For their part, the Americans regularly blame the Russians for the proliferation of extreme phenomena in the United States, such as increasingly devastating hurricanes5. In 1997, William S. Cohen, US Secretary of Defense to William Clinton, accused certain groups of "engaging in ecological-type terrorism with the aim of" altering the climate "and even" triggering remote earthquakes and volcanic eruptions through and the use of electromagnetic waves 6. Luc Mampey, researcher at the Group for Research and Information on Peace and Security (GRIP, Brussels) indicates that the concept of “environmental war” is indeed part of military language and manuals.

If it is difficult to prove that these technologies are already used today, whether for peaceful or military purposes, the subject has been the subject of numerous articles since the 2006s in the major foreign media, notably Anglo-Saxon (CBS, CNN, The New York Times, The Guardian…) and Russians (Pravda, Novye Izvestia). For the American weekly Business Week, "a technology capable of controlling atmospheric conditions would be a powerful military and political weapon". It is only since 2006 that the major French press has echoed these debates (Cf. for example "The weather as a weapon of war" in Courrier International). And the word “geoengineering” did not appear in the daily “Le Monde” until October XNUMX.

Joëlle PENOCHET copyright 2007 - Full reproduction encouraged, on condition of mentioning the author and the url of this article by a hyperlink.



(1) Created in 1998 by the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) and the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP). Site:

(2) See

(3) Col TAMZY J. House, Lt Col James B. NEAR, J, et al. : “Weather as force multiplier: Owning the weather in 2025”, August 1996, 54 p.

(4) Cf. European Parliament, Committee on Foreign Affairs, Security and Defense Policy, Brussels, doc. no. A4-0005 / 99, 14 1999 January, and European Report, February 3 1999.

(5) Thus, the famous American meteorologist Scott Stevens resigned his post at CBS after having designated the Russian army as responsible for the consequences of Hurricane Katrina which devastated New Orleans in 2005!


Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked with *