It's not enough to dump (most of the time unknown) chemicals and metals in the air, geoengineering "programs" aim to go deep.
Geoengineering covers air, ground with carbon going up or down from rocks/land, and water / sea.
Ocean fertilization programs are playing with carbon absorbtion from algeas dumping iron and others on the ocean and are in the geoengineering lobbies interests.
I do not consent
Carbon dioxide removal techniques include tree planting, creating biochar (charcoal) and burying it to increase carbon sequestration, carbon capture and storage, adding carbonate to the ocean to increase carbon dioxide uptake, and capturing carbon from the air. Klaus Lackner, Director of the Earth Institute’s Lenfest Center for Sustainable Energy, is developing an “artificial tree” that removes carbon dioxide from the air. Ocean fertilization is perhaps the most controversial carbon dioxide removal strategy of all.
Through photosynthesis, phytoplankton in the ocean absorbs half the carbon dioxide taken up annually by all of Earth’s plants. Ocean fertilization involves depositing nutrients (iron, nitrogen or phosphorus) into areas of the ocean lacking one of these key nutrients to stimulate the growth of phytoplankton and increase the absorption of carbon dioxide, which is then carried to the ocean floor when the phytoplankton die.
Critics say ocean fertilization could alter food webs; deplete oxygen at deeper ocean levels; produce eutrophication, dead zones and toxic algal blooms; increase ocean acidification in the deep sea; and impact coral reefs. While the cost of ocean fertilization would be relatively low, Britain’s Royal Society says that none of the various carbon dioxide removal methods assessed have proven to be effective at an affordable cost with acceptable side effects.
Most geoengineering research today is being done with climate models and mapping; few field tests have been conducted. The Fund for Innovative Climate and Energy Research, run by David Keith of Harvard and Ken Caldeira and funded by Bill Gates’ personal funds, has given out $4.6 million for research on climate modeling, technical feasibility, governance, potential and risks, but it does not support field-testing methods like solar radiation management and ocean fertilization that would actually interfere with the climate system. ETC argues that geoengineering cannot be tested because in order to truly assess its effect on the climate, it would need to be deployed on a massive scale, which would likely also have massive repercussions.
http://blogs.ei.columbia.edu/2012/05/01/the-double-edged-sword-of-geoengineering/
In mid-october 2012 ETC Group, working with partners, uncovered a large-scale unauthorised geoengineering scheme that had been carried out in July 300km off the west coast of Canada, close to the islands of Haida Gwaii. We discovered that this ocean fertilization scheme, which involved at least 120 tons of iron dust and iron sulphate being dumped into a highly biodiverse marine ecosystem, appeared to have given rise, at least in part, to an unusually large (10,000 sq km) plankton boom. We also learned that the principal actor behind this large dump of iron was Russ George formerly CEO of Planktos, a company that had attempted to dump iron in the waters west of the Galapagos Islands and the Canary islands in 2007. In ETC Group’s view this activity violated at least three international moratoria established through the IMO’s London Convention and the UN Convention on Biological Diversity.
