About | Programs | Events | Publications | Forums | Blog | Contact | Support   
     Login      Register    


Member Log In:

Login
If not yet a member:
Register

Monthly newsletter Daily news feed Changesurfer Radio Blog feeds
Cyborg Buddha Project



Technoprogressive? BioConservative? Huh?
Quick overview of biopolitical points of view

whats new at ieet

Nine Years to a Positive Singularity

Faulty Brains, War Brains, Olympic Brains

Making the Visible Invisible

Michael Phelps: ‘Naturally’ transhuman

Interview with Dr. Steel

comments

awadhesh on 'Nano offers hope for spinal cord injuries, diabetes, Parkinson's' (2008 08 26)

Neil on 'Michael Phelps: 'Naturally' transhuman' (2008 08 25)

Vittore on 'Facebook and the ongoing demise of anonymity' (2008 08 25)

unavalable on 'Michael Phelps: 'Naturally' transhuman' (2008 08 24)

maxx on 'Enhanced Athletes? It's Only Natural' (2008 08 23)




ieet forums

Oscar: Need a manufacturer for my nutritional supplements range of products!!! (2)

Stuart Ballard: Empowerment enhances cognition (1)

extropian.pharmer: 10- Implementing the Longevity Dividend- Methusalah or Bust (2)

extropian.pharmer: 09-Healthy Inter-generational Bonding -pt1&2; (15)

Jimmy_Adams: Intergenerational Behaviours (1)



"Si se opone la naturaleza lucharemos contra ella y la haremos que nos obedezca" ("If we are opposed by nature we will fight her and make her obey us.")
Simon Bolivar





Also check out technoprogressive multimedia on Thoughtware.tv



IEET > Security > Eco-gov > Fellows > Jamais Cascio

PrintEmailpermalinkDiscuss in Forums subscribe


Geoengineering and the Future of Desktop Fab


Jamais Cascio

Jamais Cascio


Open the Future


Posted: Mar 30, 2007

The Christian Science Monitor has a thoughtful article on the morality of geoengineering as an option for confronting climate disaster. 

It’s a decent overview of the current thinking on the subject, although it doesn’t mention a couple of topics I think are worth calling out, namely, the use of bioengineering as a way of boosting carbon uptake in the ecosystem, especially with regards to methane, and Richard Branson’s Climate Challenge, which is the first blatant geoengineering competition. I also get a couple of quotes in the piece.

(I spoke with the article author, Moises Velasquez-Manoff, for over an hour; the two quotes he used represent a very small part of the conversation. I think I come across as a bit more of an advocate of geoengineering in the article than I really am, but by and large I think I’m represented reasonably well.)

The most interesting comment comes at the end, from Ken Caldeira, a climate scientist at the Carnegie Institution at Stanford University:

“You could imagine some kind of arms race of geoengineering, where one country is trying to cool the planet and another is trying to warm the planet.”

That possibility is another reason why the development of geoengineering technologies is essentially inevitable. No nation that sees itself as a great power is going to be willing to risk having its climate and environment completely in the hands of another nation. Research into methodologies for geoengineering will happen simply out of self-preservation—after all, nobody wants to fall victim to a “terraforming gap.”

It’s hardly a good reason to pursue geoengineering, but it’s a powerful one, and further underscores the absolute need for people who see responsibility and precaution as paramount to be part of the conversation.

The Future Feels a Little Bit Closer

3dPrint.jpgI write often enough about 3D printing systems and “desktop fabrication” that when something that I shouldn’t be startled by just how fast this industry is advancing. And yet: the ZPrinter 450 looks just amazing. The promotional video is almost surreal—and if somebody had sent it to me as an example of an “artifact from the future,” I would have believed them. This is a giant, sparkly, screaming harbinger of what the next decade will hold.

It’s not quite desktop fabbing just yet, but it’s oh so very close: it’s about a single order of magnitude off in price ($40K) and speed ("output models in hours, not days") from being consumer-friendly, and needs to be about half of its current size. That’ll happen, probably by the end of this decade (if not sooner). With the “high-performance composite” polymers used as base stock, it looks like dumb objects would be pretty easy to make. The big leap in capability will happen when they can start printing out objects using truly complex polymers as core materials, particularly electroactive polymers (which can move) and organic-electronic polymers (which can compute).


Jamais Cascio is a fellow of the IEET, and a professional futurist. He writes the popular blog Open the Future.

PrintEmailpermalinkDiscuss in Forums • Send to: ¡ del.icio.us icon ¡ Digg icon


COMMENTS


YOUR COMMENT

Name:

Email:

Location:

Remember my personal information

Notify me of follow-up comments?

Please enter the word you see in the image below:




Next entry: Brain Machine Interface Videos

Previous entry: Technology pushes sporting boundaries

HOME | ABOUT | FELLOWS | STAFF | EVENTS | SUPPORT  | CONTACT US
SECURING THE FUTURE | LONGER HEALTHIER LIFE | RIGHTS OF THE PERSON | ENVISIONING THE FUTURE
CYBORG BUDDHA PROJECT | JOURNAL OF EVOLUTION AND TECHNOLOGY

RSSIEET Blog | email list | newsletter | Podcast
The IEET is a 501(c)3 non-profit, tax-exempt organization registered in the State of Connecticut in the United States.

Contact: Executive Director, Dr. James J. Hughes,
Williams 229B, Trinity College, 300 Summit St., Hartford CT 06106 USA 
Email: director @ ieet.org     phone: 860-297-2376