As part of their Paris climate overage the NY Times presents a Timesplainer intended to hit the progressive talking points on climate change in a simple Q&A format:
Short Answers to Hard Questions About Climate Change
As part of the exercise readers are encouraged to submit their own short questions, so that the Times can cherry-pick the friendly liberal ones.
My submission: Is the climate situation so desperate that Pres. Obama and Senate minority Leader Reid will drop their objections to the Yucca Mountain Nuclear Waster Repository? Or are the nuclear-deniers still opposed to this proven low-carbon technology?
Yeah, that will get an answer. I had a shorter version - "Can you spell 'nuclear'"? - but the absence of that word in the entire Q&A provided an answer. Evidently the situation is desperate but not urgent. Cities will flood, millions will starve, but Yucca Mountain will remain pristine unto the umpteenth generation. Got it.
NOW THAT IS CRAZY TALK: If you strain you can imagine The Times giving about half a phrase to geo-engineering, which is how this will eventually be solved if we reach a crisis point:
In the best case that scientists can imagine, several things happen: Earth turns out to be less sensitive to greenhouse gases than currently believed; plants and animals manage to adapt to the changes that have already become inevitable; human society develops much greater political will to bring emissions under control; and major technological breakthroughs occur that help society both to limit emissions and to adjust to climate change.
I imagine 'adjust to' could include things like controlled sulfate particle emissions to mimic the cooling effect of volcanoes.