Here’s an NPR segment on the “sexiness” of climate science, in which the concepts of geoengineering and nuclear fusion are explored.

The point is that, while things like covering large land masses with solar- and wind farms may be practical, they lack the sex appeal of things like fusion, which offers what is essentially an infinite supply of energy in perpetuity.

The problem, of course, is that, where solar and wind are here now, fusion is likely at least a decade, probably several, in the future.

Looking at geoengineering, I suppose there are people who find subject to be sexy.  Maybe these are BDSM enthusiasts; I just find the topic to be frightening.  Making wholesale and irreversible changes in the composition of the Earth’s atmosphere, and dealing with an eternity of unintended consequences, doesn’t turn me on.

Some Global Warming Technologies Are “Sexier” Than Others