Making progress towards separating CDR from the geoengineering umbrella?

Many leading experts (as well as this blog) have long advocated for removing carbon dioxide removal (“CDR”) approaches from the geoengineering umbrella. So it is great to see not a single mention of CDR in the recent Economist article advocating for careful, small-scale geoengineering research. Separating CDR from geoengineering techniques enables a much clearer conversation around the appropriate role for each field. And while misleading/confusing articles that conflate CDR and geoengineering continue to pop up in respected sources (such as Scientific American), hopefully articles like the recent one in the Economist become the norm, not the exception.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s