Center for International Environmental Law Expose the Dangers of Geoengineering

Dec 28, 2024

A ground breaking briefing /report on The Risks of Geoengineering: Accelerating Biodiversity Loss and Compounding Planetary Crises (October 2024) has just been published by The Center for International Environmental Law, (CIEL). The briefing/report is an in-depth analysis of the Risks of Geoengineering on disappearing Biodiversity of the Planet and detrimental impact on Human Health. The CIEL report debunks the myths used by a handful of oligarchs to excuse their practice of geoengineering (in the guise of philanthropy), which has never had any in depth risk assessment taken place for any of these experiments carried out on the environment and humans. CIEL have comprehensively exposed the truth about the harm that geoengineering is causing the planet and human health in favour of creating a space to focus on climate change and a call to urgently cease all geoengineering experiments.

The CIEL report addresses and debunks several myths commonly used to justify geoengineering as a viable solution to climate change. Key myths and their demystification include:

Mimicking Natural Processes: The report highlights that geoengineering technologies, such as Solar Radiation Modification (SRM) and Enhanced Weathering (EW), are not equivalent to natural processes like volcanic eruptions or natural carbon cycling. Natural processes take place on vastly different spatial and temporal scales and have naturally regulated impacts, while geoengineering introduces unprecedented risks and uncertainties.
Buying Time to Address the Climate Crisis: It debunks the argument that geoengineering can provide a temporary solution, pointing out that it does not address the root causes of climate change and instead risks prolonging fossil fuel dependence. The report emphasizes that reliance on speculative technologies leads to delaying real solutions and may lock in irreversible climate changes.
The Worth of Contending with Unknown Risks: Contrary to claims that the known risks of climate change outweigh those of geoengineering, the report emphasizes that geoengineering technologies could exacerbate these risks, creating new and potentially more significant threats to ecosystems and biodiversity.
Geoengineering Benefits to Biodiversity: The report refutes the idea that geoengineering could help biodiversity, demonstrating that technologies like SRM could cause devastating harm to ecosystems, such as disrupting food webs, altering precipitation patterns, weakening the ozone layer, and causing oxygen depletion in marine ecosystems.
Lack of International Governance: It dismisses the notion that there is no existing governance, highlighting that geoengineering has been subject to a de facto global moratorium under the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) since 2010. Several international frameworks, such as the London Protocol, have also set restrictions on specific marine-based geoengineering activities.
Insufficient Research: The report argues against the claim that more research is needed by emphasizing that testing these technologies at the required scale would effectively turn the Earth into a risky laboratory with potentially irreversible impacts. It highlights that small-scale tests cannot fully reveal the consequences of large-scale deployment.

By debunking these myths, the report encourages focusing on real, rights-based, and equity-centered solutions to the climate crisis instead of speculative technologies(CIEL_briefing_The-Risks…).

The uncomfortable debate on Geoengineering is now cleared

Some people read the words ''geoengineering'' and believe it’s still a conspiracy, yet governments and their media puppets now finally admit they are doing it. Various News Agencies have published news articles over the last few years stating they are officially running geoengineering trials, yet they do not disclose that these trials actually began 40 years ago, US scientists launch world's biggest solar geoengineering study

Scientists plan to halt global warming by DIMMING the sun and people like Bill Gates, a big vaccine advocate and Monsanto investor is funding it.

There is also Michael Silver, the CEO of American Elements, who runs a company that manufactures the nanoparticles and ingredients that go into geoengineering spraying, he claims he is an environmental philanthropist.

Then there are also the academic Institutes that carry out research for government funded geoengineering projects.

The government and media institutions use the method of half-truths used to confuse the general public. However, recently, the mainstream media are publishing articles finally admitting to using geoengineering. Although, they have been using it for the last forty, possibly fifty years.

So why are they now admitting to the use of aerosols?

It could be that several agendas are converging, with climate change being used as a justification for geo-engineering. However, this practice seems harmful to both the environment and wildlife, especially considering the toxic chemicals in the compounds being sprayed. The impact has been significant, with insect and bird populations greatly diminished. Those of us born between the 1950s and 1980s have witnessed the stark difference—there are fewer birds and insects in gardens and forests today, and the days of driving on highways with wind shields splattered with insects seem long gone. Recent European journal reports highlight that global insect and bird populations have been reduced by three-quarters compared to previous numbers, signalling a disturbing decline.

The collapse of ecosystems is becoming a global issue, and a scapegoat will likely be needed. High insect biomass and diversity are crucial indicators of healthy ecosystems, yet recent entomology studies in Germany found significant reductions in these populations, even in nature reserves and protected areas, far from agricultural lands where pesticides are typically used. This suggests that broader environmental factors, possibly linked to aerosol spraying and other geo-engineering activities, are at play.

''Global declines in insects have sparked wide interest among scientists, politicians, and the general public. Loss of insect diversity and abundance is expected to provoke cascading effects on food webs and to jeopardize ecosystem services. Unrecognized loss of insect biomass must be taken into account in evaluating declines in abundance of species depending on insects as a food source, and ecosystem functioning in the European landscape.’’ More than 75 percent decline over 27 years in total flying insect biomass in protected areas.

What are the real causes of insect and bird population reduction?

It's not just pesticides, as many of these studies were done in conservation areas away from agricultural areas. The problem is global. Rachel Carson wrote about the use of Pesticides such as DDT and the effects on Bird and Insect populations in her book The Silent Spring in 1962, one of the first most prominent written works on chemical toxicity and its impact on ecosystems and wildlife. Yet not one government scientist has done an impact study on insects, amphibians, birds, or any wildlife, let alone ecosystems or impact on human health for geoengineering risk assessments. No one is questioning or studying the risks and effects of geoengineering on ecosystems globally, let alone the effects on people's health via water pollution, soil pollution, air pollution and crops taking up these heavy metal particulates. However, there are a number of super corporations and political stakeholders who will reap vast profits from unassessed irreversible damage and ecological collapse and impact on human health.

It has also been noted by ecologists that the world's Bee populations have been decimated due to sensitivity to neonicotinoid poisons and other chemicals produced by Monsanto, Bayer and Dupont We need bees to pollinate our crops, most ecosystems rely on such pollinators, if bees disappear, this will speed up the rate of plant species extinction and loss of our food crops and food in general, we cannot survive without bees and other insect pollinators! Another possible cause of the loss of bees and other pollinators, could be due to global geoengineering, it has been noted that aluminium nanoparticles affect the bees navigation and the particles are possibly killing bees due to contaminants from the sprayed aerosol chemicals have been tested globally.

We have already lost twenty percent of our solar uptake due to solar obscuration caused by spraying of heavy metal particulates into the atmosphere. Dane Wigington of Geoengineering Watch began taking biological samples from plants, soils and rainwater on his land. Dane’s tests showed metallic nanoparticulates such as aluminium, strontium, barium, arsenic and mercury which are being sprayed globally into the atmosphere.

A new favourite is recently using graphene oxide, as one of the aerosol spray ingredients, which is used as an energy conductor and can help facilitate power in nanobots. Graphene oxide (GO) is a derivative of graphene, consisting of a single layer of carbon atoms arranged in a hexagonal lattice, but with oxygen-containing functional groups (such as hydroxyl, epoxide, and carboxyl) attached to its surface. These functional groups make graphene oxide distinct from pure graphene, affecting its electrical, mechanical, and thermal properties. Due to the presence of oxygen groups, GO’s conductivity can change in response to environmental factors (such as humidity, gas presence, or pH levels), making it highly sensitive and desirable material for use in biosensors. Graphene oxide’s ability to store charge and exhibit pseudo capacitance makes it suitable for use in batteries and supercapacitors, where energy density and charge-discharge efficiency are critical.

High concentrations, inhalation, and prolonged exposure to GO pose the greatest risks, primarily due to its ability to cause oxidative stress and inflammation. More research is needed to fully understand its long-term effects on human health,

In environmental contexts, the release of Graphene Oxide into water sources or soil could pose risks to ecosystems, although the extent of environmental toxicity is not yet fully understood.

No Environmental Impact Risk Assessments

Until CIEL's briefing was published, there has been very sparse or few official reports published on environmental impact assessments of geoengineering experiments, there have been no official government environmental impact assessments or studies on environmental toxicity and human health conducted by researchers, governments, or scientists; either before or after launching aerosol programs. This lack of oversight is highly questionable, as it amounts to an uncontrolled experiment on humanity, bypassing all official Environmental Impact Assessments (EIA) assessments of the potential impacts on human and environmental health. The absence of such studies suggests a deliberate avoidance, these approaches have not been subjected to the same rigorous EIAs as other large environmental projects. We are left to guess this is likely because the detrimental effects are already known, which is why they have not taken the initiative to conduct or publicize these assessments.

Solar geoengineering, which includes injecting aerosols like sulfates into the stratosphere to reflect sunlight, could have significant unintended consequences, including disruption of weather patterns, biodiversity loss, and potential harm to human health due to atmospheric changes. Yet, there is no global framework that mandates detailed environmental or human health assessments before implementing such technologies. Some experts and organizations, like the Center for International Environmental Law (CIELreport October 2024), have emphasized that geoengineering poses a serious risk to fragile ecosystems and can exacerbate existing environmental crises rather than solve them.

There have been very few comprehensive environmental impact assessments specifically addressing the potential effects of geoengineering on both the environment and human health. However, some key findings and concerns have emerged in recent research:

Unpredictable and Irreversible Environmental Impacts: Geoengineering technologies, such as stratospheric aerosol injection (SAI) and marine cloud brightening (MCB), may cause profound disruptions to ecosystems. These could include altered precipitation patterns, uneven cooling, and even deoxygenation in oceans, all of which could severely impact biodiversity, food webs, and ecosystem resilience. For example, aerosol particles introduced into the upper atmosphere could cause localized temperature changes, risking the collapse of critical ecosystems.
Biodiversity Loss: Large-scale deployment of geoengineering technologies is likely to accelerate species extinctions and degrade ecosystem functions such as oxygen provision and nutrient cycling. This poses a significant threat to species that are integral to maintaining healthy ecosystems.
Human Health Risks: There are serious concerns that geoengineering could negatively impact human health by degrading the ozone layer (leading to increased UV radiation exposure) and polluting freshwater resources. Increased UV radiation could raise risks of skin cancer and eye damage, while freshwater contamination could affect food security and access to clean water.
Lack of Governance and Human Rights Implications: The potential deployment of geoengineering technologies, particularly in regions most vulnerable to climate change, could violate the human rights of millions of people, particularly Indigenous communities and those in the Global South. There is a risk of creating "sacrifice zones" where local ecosystems and populations bear the brunt of negative consequences, while wealthier nations continue their reliance on fossil fuels

In conclusion, while there have been some regulatory efforts (e.g., under the Convention on Biological Diversity and the London Protocol), more thorough assessments are needed before large-scale geoengineering projects are considered, given their potentially severe environmental and human health impacts.

While there have been discussions about the environmental risks associated with geoengineering, comprehensive environmental impact assessments (EIAs) that address both ecological and human health concerns remain limited. The technologies used in geoengineering, such as solar radiation modification (SRM) and carbon dioxide removal (CDR), are largely speculative, and their potential side effects are not fully understood. Here’s a detailed breakdown of key concerns:

1. Unpredictable and Irreversible Environmental Impacts

Geoengineering technologies, such as stratospheric aerosol injection (SAI), marine cloudbrightening (MCB), and enhanced weathering (EW), aim to reduce global temperatures by either reflecting sunlight or removing CO₂ from the atmosphere. However, these interventions could have severe, unpredictable consequences for marine and terrestrial ecosystems:

Stratospheric Aerosol Injection (SAI) involves releasing reflective particles, such as sulfates, into the upper atmosphere to reduce solar radiation. While this might theoretically cool the planet, it can alter regional precipitation patterns, leading to monsoon failures or excessive warming in the poles. This uneven cooling can stress ecosystems, increasing the likelihood of species extinctions and disrupting critical functions like nutrient cycling
Marine Cloud Brightening (MCB), designed to whiten clouds and increase their reflectivity, can similarly cause disruptions in temperature distribution. For instance, MCB is expected to cool oceans but may also alter the hydrological cycle, changing rainfall patterns in critical biodiversity hotspots such as tropical rainforests. These disruptions can push ecosystems closer to collapse, especially when combined with existing stressors like deforestation and pollution.
Carbon Dioxide Removal (CDR) techniques, such as ocean fertilization and bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS), also come with their own risks. Ocean fertilization could increase harmful algal blooms, which poison marine species and disrupt food webs, while BECCS requires large-scale conversion of land for biomass production. This could lead to habitat destruction and biodiversity loss, especially in tropical grasslands, which house some of the world's most diverse ecosystems.

2. Biodiversity Loss and Ecosystem Disruptions

One of the most pressing concerns is the impact on biodiversity. Geoengineering, particularly when deployed at scale, could have devastating effects on both terrestrial and marine life:

Species Extinctions: By altering climate and weather patterns, geoengineering could accelerate species extinctions, especially for species that are sensitive to temperature changes or rely on specific weather patterns, such as certain pollinators, insects, and birds. Disrupted food webs could lead to cascading extinctions, further destabilizing ecosystems,
Nutrient and Oxygen Cycles: Many geoengineering techniques, particularly those focused on ocean-based interventions like ocean alkalinity enhancement (OAE) or artificial upwelling, could disrupt biogeochemical cycles in the oceans. These disruptions could reduce oxygen levels, leading to dead zones where marine life cannot survive. Decreasing oxygen and altering nutrient cycles would compromise primary production, which forms the foundation of both marine and terrestrial food webs
Impact on Polar and Tropical Regions: Polar ecosystems are particularly vulnerable to changes in light absorption and temperature. Technologies like cirrus cloud thinning or the introduction of micro bubbles in oceans may exacerbate melting ice, endangering polar species that rely on ice for survival. On the other hand, in tropical regions, reduced rainfall due to SAI could negatively affect rainforests, home to the majority of Earth's biodiversity.

3. Human Health Risks

There are significant concerns about how geoengineering could impact human health:

Increased UV Radiation: SAI technologies could degrade the ozone layer, which shields the planet from harmful UV radiation. Thinning of the ozone would result in greater exposure to UV rays, increasing risks for skin cancer, eye damage, and immune system suppression in humans. Increased UV exposure can also harm agricultural productivity, impacting food security.
Water and Food Security: Changes in precipitation patterns could severely affect water availability in regions that already experience water stress. For example, reduced rainfall in equatorial regions or monsoon disruptions in Asia could undermine agriculture and fishing industries, leading to food insecurity and economic instability
Direct Toxic Effects: The chemicals used in some geoengineering techniques, such as sulfates or algae fertilizers, may have toxic effects if they accumulate in ecosystems or human food chains. These toxins could contaminate freshwater sources or agricultural lands, affecting human health through chronic exposure

4. Lack of Governance and Human Rights Violations

One of the biggest concerns surrounding geoengineering is the lack of adequate governance frameworks to regulate these technologies and protect vulnerable populations. Geoengineering could disproportionately impact Indigenous Peoples, peasants, and communities in the Global South, who are often excluded from decision-making processes:

Neocolonialism: Some geoengineering projects could perpetuate neocolonial dynamics, where wealthier nations or corporations deploy technologies in developing countries, leaving local populations to bear the environmental and social costs. This could result in land grabs for large-scale bioenergy plantations or marine interventions, displacing communities and threatening traditional ways of life
Human Rights Violations: There is concern that geoengineering could violate the right to life, food, water, and a healthy environment for millions of people. For example, changes in rainfall patterns could increase droughts in already vulnerable regions, undermining food security and exacerbating inequality. The U.N. Human Rights Council has warned that these technologies may have “massive and disproportionate” impacts on Indigenous communities, especially those dependent on natural ecosystems for their livelihoods.

Conclusion

While geoengineering technologies offer speculative solutions to those concerned about climate change, the risks they pose to the environment, biodiversity, and human health are vast and largely untested. Environmental impact assessments for these technologies remain insufficient despite the large scale level that geoengineering is being carried out, and many of its long-term effects are unknown. The global community faces a significant challenge in ensuring that these experimental approaches do not worsen the very problem they aim to address. As scientists and policymakers weigh the risks, it is crucial to prioritize real environmental solutions for climate change, such as decarbonization, while safeguarding the ecosystems and communities most vulnerable to geoengineering interventions

In the USA, tests on toxic loads in rainwater revealed 3450 parts per billion of aluminium in rain water and twenty percent of the sun’s rays are now being blocked out, there has been a rise in rickets and vitamin D deficiency as a result. Our health and the health of the planet are at stake with a toxic mix of nanoparticle metals and chemicals. Aluminium particles are not only toxic but they also prevent seeds from propagating, while Monsanto are creating aluminium-resistant seeds.

When I first wrote about this in 2015 in my book The Silent Ecocide, there were zero reports and it was extremely difficult to find data as most of it is under military control, so I was unable to give an exact estimate of how much toxicity we are being exposed to each day, as there were no official statistics being published to the public as this is not an environmentally monitored practice despite it being one of the most detrimental environmental activities known to humankind, as until the recent splurge of mainstream media news articles announcing that they are about to initiate experiment with geoengineering, (which is a lie, as it has been in operation for at least forty years), this has been mostly a covert operation until recently -2024 while I am writing this update, I have just come across the world's first official public report produced by CIEL ( Center for International Environmental Law).

Its encouraging to read CIELs briefing report on geoengineering, not just for their conclusion on the problem of geoengineering but on their efforts to produce a thorough scientific briefing presenting detailed data on the impact and dangers of geoengineering so far. The Center for International Environmental Law's (CIEL) publication of this much-needed scientific analysis on the impacts of geoengineering, show that their conclusions align with my own findings, as well as those of most scientists who recognized the harmful effects of geoengineering over time. Having this report available online is a very large positive step toward greater transparency on these critical concerns. With an established organization like CIEL supporting the concerns of thousands of scientists, researchers, and doctors who oppose geoengineering, it strengthens the call for accountability of the proponents who are ignoring our warnings to cease all geoengineering activities, as there are not only grave implications on this being an environmental crime against all life on Earth, it is also violation of our Human Rights.

Geoengineering since the 1970s

The number of outdoor geoengineering field experiments has surged in recent years. According to data compiled by the Heinrich Böll Foundation and ETC Group, at least 598 outdoor geoengineering trials have been proposed since 1971. Remarkably, over 90 percent of these proposals were made between 2004 and 2023, with more than half occurring from 2019 to 2023. In this most recent period, the number of proposed experiments has quadrupled compared to the previous five years.

^Source^{CIEL briefing : report}^{above graph shows increased use of geo-engineering experiments since the 1970s-
Data analysed from the Geoengineering Map project run by the ETC Group and Heinrich Böll Foundation, last updated September 9, 2024. Data from 2024 was excluded as it is incomplete.}

One notable trend is the sharp increase in bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS) and biochar experiments, with 136 proposed from 2019 to 2023—nine times more than in the prior five years. Additionally, the number of marine carbon dioxide removal (mCDR) technology experiments, such as ocean alkalinity enhancement (OAE) and artificial upwelling, has increased more than fourfold in the same period compared to 2014–2018, indicating growing interest in ocean-based geoengineering solutions.

Summarizing CIELs Key Points on Human Rights Violations

The Advisory Committee of the Human Rights Council has issued grave warnings about the potential deployment of geoengineering technologies, stating that they could infringe on the human rights of millions, or even billions of people. The most at risk are Indigenous Peoples, traditional communities, peasants, and fisherfolk, who would face disproportionately severe impacts. Rural peasant communities are particularly vulnerable, as their lands would likely be subject to experimental geoengineering projects, leading to unprecedented social and environmental damage.

The destruction of biodiversity and the disruption of ecosystem functions caused by these technologies could devastate Indigenous cultures and spiritual practices, especially those tied to sacred sites and natural landmarks. In addition, the loss of traditional ecological knowledge would weaken their resilience against the ongoing challenges of climate mitigation being conducted by geoengineering experimenters and environmental degradation.

Geoengineering threatens a broad spectrum of human rights, including the right to a clean, sustainable environment, life, health, water, adequate food, housing, and cultural heritage. These technologies may perpetuate neocolonial practices, as power over their deployment could become concentrated in the hands of a small group of elites or powerful nations, undermining efforts for just and equitable climate solutions. Techniques like BECCS and biochar could also drive land and resource dispossession, further marginalizing vulnerable populations.

Several international agreements, such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights, and the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, impose obligations on states to protect these rights. However, geoengineering technologies would violate these obligations, inflicting widespread harm on both ecosystems and communities.

Given these risks, urgent action is needed to ensure that the rights of Indigenous and rural populations are safeguarded against the dangers posed by speculative geoengineering experiments.

Local communities are likely to experience cultural and economic losses, particularly at the regional level, due to the potential threats geoengineering poses to biodiversity. Recognizing these risks, CBD Decision X/33 emphasizes the need to integrate the perspectives and experiences of Indigenous Peoples, local communities, and relevant stakeholders when considering the impacts of geoengineering on biodiversity and its associated social, economic, and cultural implications. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has also highlighted the possible negative socioeconomic consequences that geoengineering technologies could bring, warning that they may hinder sustainable development efforts. The true scale of these impacts would likely only become evident after large-scale deployment of these technologies.

Geoengineering is also likely to reinforce the disparity of inequitable political and social power dynamics, embedding neocolonial structures and obstructing more transformative, justice-based solutions to the climate crisis. Research and development in solar geoengineering are predominantly driven by a small oligarchic group from the Global North, often supported under the guise of billionaire-funded philanthropy. There is an emerging consensus that any deployment would be controlled by a handful of powerful nations, raising concerns about potential militarization of these technologies. Moreover, land and ocean-based geoengineering methods could perpetuate neocolonialism through land and ocean grabs, violating the rights of Indigenous Peoples, peasants, fisherfolk, and rural communities.

The detrimental impacts of geoengineering on biodiversity, alongside their implications for human rights, could lead to the creation of "sacrifice zones"—areas where the most vulnerable populations bear the brunt of environmental harm, while the fossil fuel industry continues to thrive. This would entrench existing inequalities and deepen the environmental and social challenges faced by those most at risk from the climate crisis.

It’s also important to note that much of the social science analysis on geoengineering reflects perspectives from the USA and Europe, creating a potential cultural bias in how risks are assessed and decisions about geoengineering are made. This bias is apparent in the literature, which often overlooks the specific challenges that Indigenous Peoples, fisherfolk, peasants, and rural communities would face in the event of geoengineering deployment. Additionally, Indigenous belief systems, traditional ways of life, and their cosmovision—their relationship with the Earth and Sky—are frequently excluded from geoengineering risk assessments, leading to the violation of their cultural values and practices.

Summary of CIEL's Recommendations on Actions to Stop Geoengineering

As emphasized by the IPCC, safeguarding biodiversity hotspots is essential to preventing a significant decline in global biodiversity due to climate change. Geoengineering, however, fails to tackle the underlying causes of climate change and instead risks allowing industries to continue polluting unchecked. If implemented on a large scale, geoengineering could have harmful direct and indirect impacts, including damaging biodiversity, disrupting food chains, impairing oxygen production, degrading nutrient cycles, and altering precipitation patterns, which could result in uneven cooling and the weakening of the ozone layer. These disruptions could lead to severe losses in ecosystem functionality, with adverse effects on food security, water availability, human health, culture, and fundamental human rights.

The large-scale deployment of geoengineering technologies essentially turns the Earth into a plant sized laboratory, locking us into potentially devastating consequences for future generations. Instead of focusing on speculative technologies, we must concentrate on real solutions that address the challenges of climate change through equity and biodiversity conservation. The most effective approach begins with the phasing out of fossil fuels in a fair and well-funded manner.

To prevent the normalization of geoengineering and protect ecosystems, states should take the following steps:

Enforce and expand the existing moratorium on geoengineering under the Convention on Biological Diversity.
Support the development of strict regulatory controls under the London Convention/London Protocol.
Ban all outdoor geoengineering experiments in accordance with the Precautionary Principle set out in the Rio Declaration.
Withhold public funding and prevent the granting of patents or permits for geoengineering technologies.
Exclude geoengineering projects from national and international carbon markets or offset programs.
Focus on ecosystem restoration and protection, prioritizing areas with high biodiversity and preventing the spread of invasive species.

Moreover, CIEL recommended that it is crucial to ensure the rights of Indigenous Peoples, peasants, fisherfolk, and local communities are protected, as they are most vulnerable to the impacts of geoengineering experiments. Governments should urgently focus on real climate solutions, including the rapid phase-out of fossil fuels, and support sustainable alternatives through climate finance contributions from wealthier nations, ensuring fairness and social equity in the global transition.

Quantity of Materials Sprayed and Financing of Geoengineering

In the first edition of this book, when I first wrote about Geoengineering it was very challenging to find any information on a cost analysis of the few military reports for geoengineering that I could find then. I was able to gage the daily spraying of 1 million tons of geoengineering aerosol chemicals per year, per country, though this is just a baseline figure, they have also looked at the cost of spraying over 5 million tons per year. Geoengineering cost analyses suggest that large-scale aerosol spraying programs, such as stratospheric aerosol injection (SAI), could involve significant financial outlays. One study estimates the cost of delivering 1 million tons of sulfates into the stratosphere annually at $1 to $2 billion per year for an aircraft-based system, which would involve thousands of flights per year. This approach, while technologically feasible, would require dedicated high-altitude aircraft that do not currently exist but could be developed specifically for this purpose

Another cost analysis highlights that more ambitious geoengineering operations, scaling up to 5 million tons per year, could multiply expenses dramatically. These larger programs would necessitate complex systems, such as suspended pipes or other delivery mechanisms, with costs that could reach $10 billion or more annually depending on the specific techniques employed

Agriculture Defense Coalition

These figures are just the baseline for initial operations, not accounting for potential hidden costs such as environmental impacts, long-term maintenance, or the risk of geopolitical conflicts arising from unilateral geoengineering actions.

The lack of detailed financial transparency is still a significant issue. Many reports suggest that funding comes from a small group of elite backers, but exact sources remain opaque. It's crucial to monitor these developments closely, as the true scale and long-term consequences of such geoengineering programs could far exceed initial cost estimates.

Chemicals in the Toxic Soup

Geoengineering often involves various chemicals and compounds that are either proposed or speculated to be part of aerosol spraying programs for altering climate conditions. Some of the key chemicals that have been suggested in various geoengineering initiatives include:

Aluminium (Al): Frequently mentioned as part of stratospheric aerosol injection (SAI), aluminium particles are proposed to increase the atmosphere’s reflectivity by scattering sunlight, cooling the Earth’s surface.
Barium (Ba): Often included in discussions of aerosol spraying, barium has been cited in geoengineering theories for its reflective properties.
Strontium (Sr): Proposed as another reflective element, strontium compounds could theoretically be sprayed in the atmosphere to aid in solar radiation management.
Sulphur Dioxide (SO₂): One of the most widely proposed chemicals for solar radiation management (SRM). Sulphur dioxide, when released into the stratosphere, forms sulfate aerosols, mimicking the cooling effects observed after large volcanic eruptions
Mercury (Hg): Mercury is often mentioned in relation to environmental and health impacts of industrial pollution but has also been speculated as a component in geoengineering strategies, though less commonly than other metals.
Arsenic (As): Like mercury, arsenic is primarily known as an environmental toxin but is sometimes speculated to be part of atmospheric spraying programs.
Titanium Dioxide (TiO₂): Some studies suggest that titanium dioxide could be an alternative to sulfur compounds for its potential to reflect sunlight more efficiently, though its effects on the environment are still under study
Carbon Black: Also known as soot, carbon black has been proposed in certain geoengineering experiments for its ability to absorb sunlight and potentially alter localized weather conditions.
Calcium Carbonate (CaCO₃): Some research suggests that calcium carbonate aerosols could be used in solar radiation management as an alternative to sulfur-based methods, with potentially fewer negative impacts on the ozone layer Agriculture Defense Coalition

Each of these chemicals carries its own set of risks and consequences, ranging from ozone layer depletion to acid rain formation and toxicological effects on both human health and ecosystems. It's important to note that while these chemicals are speculated or proposed in geoengineering research, many have not been deployed at scale, and their long-term environmental and health impacts remain uncertain. (References to this list are in Endnotes Harvard and Smithsonian, particularly)

The official narrative of chemicals being used by geoengineering scientists is supposed to be Sulphuric Acid, H2SO4 and Sulphur Dioxide SO2. Remember the term 'acid rain'. In one published article in a UK newspaper, they stated that geoengineering can help save coral reefs.

“We show very convincingly that, by injecting Sulphur dioxide in the atmosphere, sea surface temperatures would decrease significantly by 2069.”

An oxymoron statement, considering the very thing that kills coral reefs is the above ingredients found in Geoengineering aerosols and acid precipitation. Sulfates in aerosols also cause drying effects in geoengineering, which can influence cloud formation and precipitation patterns by increasing cloud reflectivity and potentially reducing rainfall (If the geoengineering practice is supposed to mitigate global warming then why use Sulfates if they prevent precipitation?). For example, sulfur dioxide (SO₂) aerosols can lead to reduced monsoon rains and altered hydrological cycles, contributing to drier conditions in certain regions. This does the opposite to what these geoengineering proponents claim its objective is for.

The accumulative effects of Sulphuric acid and Sulphur dioxide is detrimental to plants and wildlife, Sulphuric acid causes leaching of nutrients from plants and from soils. Plants die from being exposed to long term spraying of SO2, necrosis forming on the leaves of trees and crops is a sign, and its everywhere.

In a study done by the Environmental Protection Agency in 1979 it is stated that ''Plants have been found to be injured by high concentrations of Sulphuric Acid Aerosol, 100 to 200 mgs/m3 for four to 16 hours a day''

Insecticide

Aerosol Sulphuric acid can be transformed through the air turbines when being dispersed to Sulphur dioxide, SO2, and Sulphur trioxide, SO3. Sulphur dioxide, SO2, is also used in active agricultural insecticides such as the strongest toxins, of those that act as general protoplasmic poisons for insects. A protoplasmic poison is when the toxin gets inside the cell plasma of the organism and blocks the basic energy production and/or transport system in a living cell, like cyanide does, effective poisoning. In other words, Sulphur dioxide, SO2 is regarded as one of the most reliable poisons, used in insecticides for the destruction of insects when used in a gaseous state. This major connection between the decline in Insects, Birds and Amphibians, our most sensitive bio-indicators and geoengineering urgently needs to be investigated. The accumulative effects on this globally will have a far more detrimental results than pesticides on ecosystems and wildlife.

Something Monsanto would benefit from no doubt? All while Monsanto are launching robotic pollinators, they also have produced aluminium-resistant seeds, in addition to their goal to patent all life, they are doing quite well in such times.

The Environmental Protection Agency also state on their very own website that ''Sulphur dioxide SO2 harms the human respiratory system and make breathing difficult. Children, the elderly, and those who suffer from asthma are particularly sensitive to effects of SO2''.

What is Mycoplasma?

It's the smallest bacteria, 4,000 of which could fit in a blood cell. It confuses other cells as it has incomplete DNA and can copy the DNA of its host, which can cause cancer in the host. For no logical reason it is an ingredient used in vaccines, as a main ingredient despite the fact it is a disease pathogen and bacteria. Would some pro-vaccine doctor please explain the logic behind this? Why is there a Patent of mycoplasma hyopneumoniae? Or are we just dealing with more psychopathic population control again? Does this explain why microbiologists are being murdered or suicided? The Military weaponized and patented Mycoplasma bacteria in 1986. Pathogenic mycoplasma has also been sprayed and tested on the Military and is the main disease agent of the Gulf War Illness. See the published Military Patent of Mycoplasma fermentans.

Doctor Garth Nicolson is the head of the Institute for Molecular Medicine. Dr. Nicolson ¹⁶ gave a presentation at the 9th Common Cause Medical Research Foundation Conference, Sudbury, Ontario, Canada on Aug. 29-31, 2008.

He stated
"The emergence of new illnesses and an increase in the incidence rate of previously described signs & symptoms are due to our toxic environment & the purposeful development & testing of Weapons of Mass Destruction."- Dr. Garth Nicolson.

Doctor Nicolson has a great wealth of research based on Mycoplasma, and is concerned that after its weaponisation, that Cancer and various autoimmune related illnesses have exponentially risen.

Mycoplasma has been sprayed in various operations over different demographic populations to cause diseases and prime people for new ones, it is one of the disease agents in ¹⁷ AIDS, Multiple Sclerosis, Wegener's disease, Rheumatoid Arthritis, Type I diabetes, Hepatitis, Pancreatitis, Arthritis, Heart disease, Anaemia; And neurologic disease such as Parkinson's disease, Crohn's colitis, Alzheimer's, Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease and other autoimmune and neurological illnesses. More on the increased pilot spraying projects on Mycoplasma here

¹⁸Professor Donald Scott is a veteran of WWII. He has extensively researched neurosystemic degenerative diseases and written many papers on the relationship between degenerative diseases and Mycoplasma fermentans. His research is based upon solid government evidence.

''My conclusions are entirely based upon official documents: 80% are United States or Canadian official government documents, and 20% are articles from peer-reviewed journals, such as the Journal of the American Medical Association, The New England Journal of Medicine, and The Canadian Medical Association Journal. The journal articles and government documents complement each other. We also have a document from Dr. Shyh-Ching Lo which names the mycoplasma as a cause of cancer''. - Professor Donald Scott.

Dr. Charles Engel who is with the National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, stated at an NIH meeting on February 7, 2000, "I am now of the view that the probable cause of Chronic Fatigue Syndrome and fibromyalgia is the mycoplasma".

Mycoplasmal pneumonia is connected to causing H1N1, it is a lab created military patented virus, bird flu and Swine mycoplasmal pneumonia military patent CN106929480A. Solely for the purpose of making money out of the ready-made vaccines.

Mycoplasma also encourages environments for fungus and there is a medicinal research group that classes cancer as a fungus. Medical research shows that cancer arises through damaged DNA which is interesting when considering that Mycoplasma contains incomplete DNA and when the bacteria infect the host they can copy the host DNA and this causes cancer to arise.

Testimonial evidence that the biotech and bio pharmaceutical stakeholders, investors and CEOs of these industries have their two-sided philanthropic theatricals with government backed financing; While spraying Mycoplasma bacteria with geoengineering aerosols to prime wildlife, insect pollinators, people and agricultural animals for more diseases; so they can rake in the profits from these illnesses and disease exponentially on the rise and the vaccines that they then create as a result are also laced with more mycoplasma and toxins. How thoughtful of them.

Recent testing by citizen scientists in Washington state from hair samples and soil samples tested high in Vanadium. The spraying of mycoplasma is a prime for the rest of this stuff. Mycoplasma mixed with ²²vanadium mixed with Oily Fly Ash cause microbes to thrive and a journal paper published in Environmental Health Perspectives clearly states that Epidemiologic studies have demonstrated increased human morbidity and mortality with elevations in the concentration of vanadium combined with Oily Fly Ash.

The projected predictions for Alzheimer's is a big concern in itself, 5.5 million individuals have “Alzheimer’s dementia ” in the USA and 1.2 million people in the UK by 2040. Everyone talks about avoiding aluminium foil and cooking pots but no one points to the geoengineering aerosols where over 1 million tons of aluminium in aerosol sprayed, It accumulates in the soil, the food, the water, the air, it is a neurotoxin heavy metal and is showing up in lab tests of precipitation from around the globe. If it’s in the rain, it’s in the air.

So why are they spraying and what is it really for? In a recent news article about geoengineering operations, Kevin Anderson the deputy director of the Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research stated “It is appropriate that we spend money on solar geoengineering research,” But we also have to aim for 2C with climate mitigation and act as though geoengineering doesn’t work, because it probably won’t.”

This translates to ''we don't know if it will work but we are doing it anyway even without an official risk assessment or environmental impact assessment ''

These global geoengineering projects are poisoning our wildlife, our health and interfering with our natural brain waves and state of mind.

The rest of their use is kept more secret as much of the aerosol ingredients are made up of nanometal particulates and even lithium.

The military industrial complex is creating a synthetic nanoparticle highway in our troposphere and stratosphere to create digitally controlled fields for Next Generation Operational Control System GPS OCX Satelite GPS systems. These satellite systems are contracted by Lockheed Martin, who also specialize in Directed Energy Weapon Systems, GPS Block IIIA and GPS III is the next generation of GPS satellites, which Lockheed Martin and other parts of the Global Military Industrial Complex use for malevolent purposes with psychotropic weapons, Directed Energy Weapons, defence and communications. Microwaves, EMF frequencies, RF frequencies and Quantum plasmic fields are used for digital transmission signals. All of these benefit from pressing geoengineering for combating global warming.

These aerosol nanoparticulates and chemicals are conducting heat and cooking the ionosphere, especially in conjunction with the HAARP arrays, they are not deflecting solar rays or cooling the planet. The conduction of synthetic waves and frequencies can also be used to change human brain waves, in 2015 it was revealed in the Guardian News that scientists can manipulate brain neurons with nanoparticles, allowing them to activate brain cells remotely using light or magnetic fields to heat the nanoparticles, this raises great concern since we are already breathing in nanoparticles each day due to geoengineering.

Such technology can be used with the use of psychotronic generators which originally were invented by Igor Smimov and used by shadow governments for mass mind control purposes, technology that can also be used in conjunction with your smartphone.

Over the past years, US researchers have confirmed the possibility of affecting functions of the nervous system by weak electromagnetic fields (EMFs), as it was previously said by Soviet researchers, reads a 1982 article in a Russian science publication cited in the report.

“EMFs may cause acoustic hallucination (’radiosound’) and reduce the sensitivity of humans and animals to some other stimuli, to change the activity of the brain (especially the hypothalamus and the cortex), to break the processes of formation processing and information storage in the brain. These nonspecific changes in the central nervous system can serve as a basis for studying the possibilities of the direct influence of EMFs on specific functions of CNS.” The New American- Elements of Soviet Mind Control

The Sun obscuration chemical assault has been going on since the 1970s, around the same time the amphibians, bird and insect populations started noticeably declining. Geoengineering has been released in dangerous loads and are not only affecting insects, birds and fish but also possibly killing trees, forests, and are possibly to blame for the masses of fish and birds die offs being documented globally. There has also been a large reduction of boreal forests. Trees are dying with no explanation of what the causes are but they all show signs of necrosis and weakened bark due to Sulphur dioxide, SO2. All as a consequence of geoengineering, we live in a planet sized laboratory, where all life forms are being experimented on without our consent and sprayed with chemicals similar to insecticides; with absolutely no risk assessment studies on the ecological impact on wildlife populations, soil, sea, air, seed propagation, water pollution.

In the last forty years half of all Amphibians have gone extinct, they are some of the most sensitive bio-indicators that we have because they will be directly affected by toxins released into the environment because they use their skin as a secondary breathing apparatus, and the toxins can soak through their skin and cause their extinction through direct poisoning. So we have about 47 percent of all Amphibians extinct, this is not just due to pesticides, as most amphibians are not found near agricultural land since that is not where their best food sources are, something far larger and far more powerful has to be considered.

Two separate studies on birds and insects in Germany found the number of flying insects has declined by 76 percent over the past 27 years. There are 15 percent fewer birds than just twelve years ago. Sadly, it is my generation and the generation before us that will be the last to remember more birds and more insects when we were younger, the sound of birdsong woke us up in the mornings. Children born in the next twenty or thirty years don’t have this luxury of comparison, nor will they grow up thinking geoengineering is abnormal as they don’t know what the sky was like over forty years ago, when we had blue skies and no criss-crossing lines or whispy chemical rainbow clouds that we have today.

"Near the Day of Purification, there will be cobwebs spun back and forth in the sky." - Hopi Mythology

Another aspect of this toxicity is causing respiratory problems in millions of people, the chemicals being sprayed have a synergetic toxicity when combined with mercury and other chemicals in human vaccines, it is no wonder that autism has increased with no scientific explanation other than population increase being the main factor. The ozone layer is also being decreased due to the toxins in geoengineering, not CFCs, so this in turn affects the planetary albedo; the ability to reflect the sun’s rays naturally is being reduced, this has a very large effect on weather and climate manipulation.

At the most recent International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) conference, in Australia in November 2014, Simon Stuart, Chair of The Species Survival Commission, stated that ''almost no country in the world is heading in the right direction considering the targets to stop species extinction by 2020''.

We are barely scratching the surface of the environmental crisis which we are in and unfortunately most environmental scientists are afraid to speak out against geoengineering or the effects of EMF and other psychotropic technology. People are accused of being ‘conspiracy theorists’, despite the growing scientific evidence and data from samples collected globally, witnesses to mass bird, bee, bat and insect die off due to 5G and mycoplasma. This is a harsh reality we must face, examine and deal with, to find solutions to protect ecosystems affected, our own health and the environmental impact on other species which may result in irreversible accelerated species extinction.

Post Covid 2020-2024

As I reiterate these paragraphs below to illustrate a piece of the puzzle which you read earlier, originally published in research from 2015.

''The military industrial complex is creating a synthetic nanoparticle highway in our troposphere and stratosphere to create digitally controlled fields for Next Generation Operational Control System GPS OCX Satelite GPS systems. These satellite systems are contracted by Lockheed Martin, who also specialize in Directed Energy Weapon Systems, ''

''Such technology can be used with the use of psychotronic generators which originally were invented by Igor Smimov and used by shadow governments for mass mind control purposes, technology that can also be used in conjunction with your smartphone.

Over the past years, US researchers have confirmed the possibility of affecting functions of the nervous system by weak electromagnetic fields (EMFs), as it was previously said by Soviet researchers, reads a 1982 article in a Russian science publication cited in the report.''

Post-Pandemic Reflections

Nearly a decade later, it’s clearer that much of what we experienced in the last four years were events manipulated for those at the very top of the economic system with stake-holds in the pharmaceutical and surveillance technology industries. These nanoparticles found in geoengineering compounds are linked to external satellite and computer biosensor systems, possibly using quantum computers like the D-Wave. They reportedly utilize biometrics of lifeforms in a feedback loop with the nanobots now inhabiting most people breathing in the smart dust and nanotechnologies that are now showing up in geoengineering aerosol spraying.

What’s more heartbreaking is that this technology is now appearing in wildlife—deer, squirrels, and likely many other species. As geoengineering becomes more pervasive, it seems those behind this agenda aim not only to poison but also to control and digitize all life on the planet. This suggests that the ultimate goal of geoengineering is not to mitigate climate change, but instead to integrate and monitor all life into the "Internet of Everything." Humans and nature have been irrevocably changed and geoengineering is a critical part of this problem.

CIEL’s report effectively debunks many of the myths that have been used to justify the continuation of geoengineering practices. These myths are carefully examined and challenged and now available for all to see. Their analysis makes it clear that geoengineering, far from being a solution to climate change, introduces unprecedented risks to both the environment and human health. The long-term consequences remain unknown, yet the dangers have been made clear. (See in endnotes, for the last 11 references).

Carlita Shaw

Support my endeavours

Buy me a Ko Fi

https://ko-fi.com/carlitashaw

Why Supporting My Work Matters—Carlita's interviews and news explore information that reflects the issues we contend with as humanity stands at a pivotal nexus point. We are venturing into uncharted territory with emerging technologies that bring new challenges and evolving paradigms that push against old beliefs and agendas. In this transformative era, we become the new mapmakers and seed-planters.

1. Bridging Knowledge Gaps-As a neurodivergent female researcher and writer, I bring a unique perspective to challenging mainstream narratives and outdated perceptions. My work in environmental conservation, health freedom, free speech, and learning from the ancients, aiming to fill the gaps in understanding, serving to bridge paradigms and navigate the complexities of a rapidly changing world, I have traveled to the far reaches of the Amazon rainforest with my work to learn from Indigenous voices and lived and travelled in over 15 countries in the last 18 years.

2. Championing Diverse Voices- Firstly, I have always had a unique perspective because of my Aspergers, ADHD, and dyslexia. I persevere despite these neurodivergent challenges. Moreover, being a woman means I have to work much harder to gain any recognition in what I do, I often feel invisible and that my work isn't gaining the momentum it deserves. Women often face additional hurdles in gaining recognition for their work. By supporting my efforts, you’re helping amplify a voice that challenges stereotypes and archetypes, valuing creativity, innovation, and substance over superficial expectations. A woman’s voice is often seen through a clouded lens of societal judgment and archetypes, where others feel compelled to place her in a predefined box—she is typically only validated by her attractiveness or for her academic achievements if she carries titles before or after her name. Otherwise, she has to work much harder to have her voice or work noticed compared to her male peers, as we still live in a patriarchal world, that's why it's valuable for us all to support the work of independent female researchers, writers, journalists, artists, filmmakers, digital media producers.

3. Fearless Exploration- There have been times in the past where I have found myself in some very challenging life-or-death scenarios. That’s why I feel I have nothing to lose anymore and I am wholeheartedly committed to tackling topics that others may shy away from, because they might challenge the mainstream narratives, encouraging critical thinking and fostering meaningful dialogue. Your support enables me to continue my commitment to creating impactful work that inspires and informs.

Thank you

Excerpt From New Book -

The Silent Ecocide Redux 2024 exposes #Climate agenda for it's real motive is, #Geoengineering and what's really driving #ecocide, looking at real solutions governments oppress and how to overcome this planetary crisis available in paperback or kindle

This newly revised edition of The Silent Ecocide Redux brings fresh updates and critical scientific data, while preserving the core elements that made the original edition so impactful.

The 2024 updated edition is an important contribution to this work of The Silent Ecocide, as it provides an important ten year comparison of data from 2015 when the first edition was published, giving almost a decade glimpse at species in danger of extinction and habitat degradation, we see a shocking drop in number of species in just less than ten years.

Key features of this edition include:

Exclusive Interviews: Rare transcripts with free energy pioneers, whose knowledge remains suppressed and may soon be inaccessible.

Wildlife Extinction Crisis: A startling analysis between 2015 data and 2024 data reveals that the number of endangered species has doubled in just nine years, highlighting the global environmental emergency.

Geoengineering Exposed: Updated shocking recent report briefing from the Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL) confirm that geoengineering, far from being a solution to climate change, threatens human and ecological health, wildlife biodiversity, and human rights.

The Hidden Impact of Technology: Explore how emerging technologies—such as synthetic biology and nano-sized innovations—are disrupting ecosystems, wildlife, and human health, especially in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Ancient Amazonian Civilizations: New evidence uncovers the sophisticated civilizations that once cultivated the Amazon, reinforcing the crucial role of Indigenous peoples as the rainforest’s original guardians.

Technocracy and Consciousness: Delve into the profound impact of modern technocracy on human consciousness and the spiritual challenges we face as we attempt to reconcile technological advancements with ecological sustainability.

Anyone interested in being on the email list will get a free Kindle copy of The Silent Ecocide Redux 2024. Just comment below or shoot me a private message or email - thesilentecocide@gmail.com