In the IPCC reports and the New York Times articles they state that we are having a huge issue with global warming which is correct. The biggest and seemingly most successful techno fix that can stop global warming may do more damage than good at first. The fix is causing temperatures to rise 3.6 degrees, and then bringing the temp back down below the 2.7-degree threshold (Davenport). The major problem with this is not only the super short and limited time frame they have to implement it before we go past the point of no return, but the fact that all the coral reefs will die, which would do huge damage to our ocean life following the butterfly affect.
I do not think that climate science today has the ability to fix climate change and keep the earths animals and plants at a healthy level. This is due to all of the scientists having an idea on how to fix the world, but none have been implemented no one has stepped up and starting doing small studies about how their or someone else’s’ ideas will work or affect the world. After reading Michael Reidy’s article the statement seems true in the sense that no one is using techno-fixes to stop climate change and that the only ideas they have to stop climate change (not using coal) could work, but are highly unrealistic because the world we know today runs off coal and that in my opinion will not work to save the earth, only prolong the enviable.