We are asked to marvel at the shiny innovations brought to us by our technological superiors, and while we wait for them to solve climate change for us, we are given strategies to cope with the stress. Climate Change is thus transformed – or perhaps reduced – from a political problem to a technological one. I propose we name these kinds of technologies Technological Antisolutions.
A Technological Antisolution is a product that attempts to replace a boring but solvable political or social problem with a much sexier technological one that won’t work. This does not mean that we should stop doing R&D.
[…]
I propose that for something to be a technological antisolution, it must meet the following 5 criteria:
- It claims to solve a serious social or political problem.
- It is intrinsically incapable of addressing said problem.
- It is profitable under current market conditions.
- It further entrenches existing power structures.
- It is sexy.
I couldn’t read the whole thing because of the pop up that covered my whole mobile phone. But as far as I can tell they made no good case for why burying trees is not a viable solution. Okay, if it’s not net carbon negative or too expensive, then fine. But they didn’t make that case at all from what I saw.
