Geoengineering is inevitable – the plan ensure that is has oversight and avoids their hyperbolic claims

My own view is somewhat different. In engaging with the world as it is, rather than as one might wish it to be, it is essential to realize that climate engineering is far too enticing and powerful a notion to be shoved aside. Climate engineering is not going away. No new taboo will be erected that forces the climate engineering genie entirely back into its bottle. Desperation is too strong a motivator. And so for me the question is not climate engineering or no climate engineering. The question becomes, are there forms of climate engineering, and ways of conducting the conversation about climate engineering approaches, that can bring out the best in humanity's climate response? Climate engineering is emerging as a key site of political struggle. But the struggle is not just over whether or not climate engineering is a good idea - a bipolar, "to geoengineer or not to geoengineer" debate. Instead, it is a more complex, nuanced struggle, which has to do with the role of engineering within the broader set of responses to climate change, and the particular character of engineering options that might see development or deployment. It will require extraordinary vigilance to ensure that climate engineering technologies are not advanced as some kind of false solution. The task ahead is to push the climate engineering conversation in productive rather than destructive directions. This can best happen to the degree that climate engineering is subjected to careful, early, and well-crafted social oversight. The need for active civic engagement with climate engineering Climate engineering is not some fiendish plot hatched by a group desperate to ward off real action on climate change. It could well serve the same function, though, by distracting us from other, more beneficial actions. Climate engineering certainly fits neatly with current dominant ways of understanding and responding to climate change, by telling us that climate change is a discrete and manageable "problem" that can be tackled via technological means. And yet, at the same time, climate engineering is not something that can be written off or ignored. I have asked here, can any engagement with climate engineering be productive? The answer is, it depends; it rests on how the conversation is engaged. The argument set out above is that consideration of climate engineering is now inevitable, so that the task of those interested in climate politics and political action becomes to ensure that the climate engineering conversation is a productive one. As the chorus of voices calling for consideration of climate engineering continues to grow in size and volume, as it is bound to do, it will become ever more important for a wider array of actors to engage productively in the conversation. Climate engineering is not some aberrant, marginal response to climate change. It is, instead, the expected response of a culture that partly looks to technological solutions to complex societal challenges. Other approaches exist. These need to be heard to guide the direction of climate engineering research and incorporate such forays into the broader challenge of addressing climate change.