>You're taking water from clouds that would normally have dropped it elsewhere, which just shifts the problem by depriving some other region of the water it relies on.

The majority of rain falls over the ocean, so it may not be taking it from somewhere that needs more water.

Sure, but in this case what they're taking is from clouds that are over land. I have a vague memory that western US weather patterns blow in from the pacific and drop it further east over the US, so an ocean drop may not be the destiny for this particular water. But I absolutely cannot assert this with any confidence without falling into the dunning-krueger hole. Although I do know just enough about water rights to know that doing this could get messy.

The Rocky Mountains squeeze most of that water out. Here in the midwest, we get Gulf hot wet air swirling up, and cold Canadian air swirling down, and Wham! we get thunderstorms where they meet!

Curiously the water that rains on the East Coast is a sort of rolling storm of rain/evaporation/wind/rain-but-further-east. A recycling of the same bolus of water over and over again. Been going on for millions of years.

But taking water in the Rockies will have comparatively little effect on rainfall in the oceans vs immediate surrounding geographies.

The world is pretty complex - are we sure that causing less rainfall over oceans wouldn't have some weird knock on effect for the environment? Does fresh water falling on ocean surfaces contribute to the known stratification of salinity that allows some animals/plants/whatever to be able to survive in the top layer of water?

We have a problem: we're farming lettuce in Arizona. It feels a lot safer to just stop doing that then try to fix the issues with work arounds that might cause bigger issues.

I know this isnt a great counterpoint for doing more geoengineering but; we are already massively terraforming the planet from the micro to the mesoscale. Its caused untold chaos for the biosphere already. In a very real way geoengineering is the only solution. Even reducing emissions is just us toggling in the CO2 knob.

I agree that we are already massively terraforming the planet, and that there is some terraforming we should stop and dinner we should do more of.

One possibility is that the resulting drier air over a body of water downwind will cause the water to evaporate more quickly, therefore charging the atmosphere with moisture again more quickly, and effectively increasing the total bandwidth of the water cycle.

> You're taking water from clouds that would normally have dropped it elsewhere, which just shifts the problem by depriving some other region of the water it relies on

That's an interesting idea. Countries have gone to war over water rights. One country builds a dam to hog all the water, and the neighboring country gets angry enough to blow up this dam. Would seeding clouds take away rain that could have dropped on another country that equally needs the rain?

> Countries have gone to war over water rights

What are you referring to?

Man, kids today with their precautionary principle. Also, this whole idea that “the thinking that got us into this mess can’t get us out.”

Or, the world is complicated and progress is complicated and we just keep on keeping on because probably they will work out.

Both of these are faith based positions, it seems. But I like the latter. The precautionary principle is way too risky for my taste.

The issue is there's not a unified "we" here and progress is localized. If my region can end a recession by increasing rain & agricultural yields we'll certainly do it. If it causes a famine in an adjacent region that was already deeply impoverished, that's net progress isn't it?

The world is complicated, and the answer to that is humility and conservative consideration of specific circumstances, not throwing up your hands and figuring it'll all work out. You can't average human life & wellbeing together like that.

2) You're taking water from clouds that would normally have dropped it elsewhere, which just shifts the problem by depriving some other region of the water it relies on.

Shifting where the rain fall doesn't mean it causes the problem elsewhere. It may cause no problems to have less rain in that location, or that location may have problems with too much rain so you are actually solving two issues at once.