Hello out there. It's 'question and no-good-answer' time.
If you were somehow under the impression that theunlikelyactivist could sort it all out for you, I'm sorry to disappoint. Actually, resisting the temptation to think that my sustainability quest endowed me with more answers than questions is especially easy this time around. This is, as my 4th grade daughter likes to say, "A toughie."
The question boils down to this. How do you feel about the use of technology--of the bio sort in this case--to help 'pro-adaptively' (I made that up) fight the effects of climate change? I don't pose this to rile up the anti-GMO crowd. Or, for that matter, the biotech enthusiasts among us. In fact, I think it's a question that transcends the heretofore traditional pro and con discussion. It's less about bio-manipulation for arguably indulgent purposes, and more about the use of our growing mastery to enable perhaps millions to survive increasingly deteriorating conditions.
If I'm sure of anything, it's that this post is by now most likely as clear as mud to you. Perhaps the following will help. Just take a minute to click below and listen to the two short audio pieces from NPR's Marketplace that brought this all to light for me.
The first, entitled Investing in a harsher climate sets up the premise nicely.
The second, entitled Global fixes for global warming raises yet another intriguing question: When does a technological 'fix' become an excuse for inaction in other areas of climate change management?
Maybe I'm just trying to take the easy way out today. But then, maybe getting your mind churning towards your own answers will leave you much better served. Happy listening.