That private companies are proposing various measures to deal with the global warming issue, including attempts at "fertilizing" some parts of the oceans with iron, hoping to encourage carbon absorbing blooms of plankton. Meanwhile there is also talk about injecting chemicals into the atmosphere, placing sun-reflecting mirrors into stationary orbit to stabilize the warming atmosphere of the planet.

Clearly a broader discussion involving all stakeholders (most importantly, the general consumer fraternity across the planet) needs to be set in motion regarding the use of scientific and technological innovations to resolve the health issues looming over survival of life forms on planet earth.

Questions about introducing nanotechnology and genetic engineering, robotics and other emerging technologies into everyday consumption routines, are still beyond the comprehension of the general class of consumers, who actually will be the most affected by all this. These newly-engineered systems with potential to impact our lives raise ethical questions, but only in hindsight as did the introduction of the atomic bomb in our lives. Experience should have taught us that it is almost impossible to turn back. Bill Joy cited the bomb in a famous 2000 article in 'Wired' in which he argued that some technologies are so dangerous that they should be 'relinquished'. He said that the latest technologies with 'unknown unknowns' pose a threat that is different than any technologies that have come before.

Consumption-induced climate change is demonstrating the power that consumers have over the future of their survival and the problems that will inevitably be unleashed through the unconsidered introduction of any technology with short-term gains. The market of course is again the culprit, as usual, because it was 'Planktos', a US based concern that mooted the idea of fertilizing parts of North Atlantic with iron to produce carbon absorbing plankton blooms, that the company would market as carbon offsets.

The world and its consumers have to be extremely conservative and cautious and not rush in to give unconsidered consent to ubiquitously introduced changes into their consumption choices.

The debate on their behalf rages on with scientists like Mary Warnock who caution that ignorance and fear should not be allowed to dictate choices about which technologies are given the go ahead, and consumers should be educated to understand science, and appreciate technology's potential for good.

However the other side of the debate questions a lay-person's ability to "recognize when we might be putting ourselves on a negative technological treadmill by moving in one direction rather than another?"

There are social, ethical, environmental as well as health questions we should be paying attention to.

Consumer VOICE, despite its phenomenal limitations and lack of various kinds of support, has always tried its humble best to alert, caution and educate its subscribers. A pro-active and participatory role is envisioned for consumers, because that is where the future of consumer education is headed.