Mainstream politics have yet to seriously intrude upon geoengineering research. This is not to give short shrift to the work done by a reflective community of researchers in the natural, applied, and social sciences, in exploring the human dimensions of an engineered climate. A rich field of societal concerns and stakeholders, driven by scientists' recognition of a need to forestall technocracy, has been installed at the centre of discussions since the publishing of the Royal Society's seminal report and the Asilomar International Conference on Climate Intervention Technologies. Mainstream politics have yet to seriously intrude upon geoengineering research. The lack of catalytic activity since Crutzen's article should not be overstated; actions in a nascent, still indeterminate landscape can radically alter political realities and future expectations. A number of influential researchers have long claimed that political imaginaries – particular ones focusing on risk – have begun to outstrip actual scientific knowledge and technology development in geoengineering.