Risks of Geoengineering
Some governments are hoping for and relying on geoengineering, tech that either pulls carbon from the atmosphere or reflects sunlight back into space, to mitigate human-caused global heating. Recent experiments, though, have caused countries to ban geoengineering as a solution to the climate crisis and scientists are worried about dangerous consequences, not yet fully understand, that could alter our weather system and end up causing more harm than good. This makes clear that we need to get to the root of the issue, banning fossil fuels, transitioning to renewables, and protecting biodiversity and carbons sinks, instead of using geoengimeering as a band-aid solution that might buy us more time but won’t save us and comes with its own set of risks.
Read a roundup of the headlines:
“The scientific community divides geoengineering into two broad categories: removing greenhouse gases, specifically carbon dioxide, from the atmosphere, and solar radiation modification. These include a variety of techniques, from painting a rooftop white to reflect the sun's rays to injecting aerosols into the stratosphere…
But these methods can also be very dangerous. We don't entirely know the effects of implementing this kind of technology. There may be things out there that scientists have not yet discovered. We do know that if we do it in an unrestrained or irregular way it can alter weather patterns," Parker adds.
Parker refers to the significant side effects solar radiation modification could bring, such as acid rain, depletion of the ozone layer or changes in weather patterns.”
Dialogo Chino, Geoengineering in Latin America may create more problems than it solves
“More than sixty scientists from prominent institutions are advocating for rigorous study into reflecting sunlight away from the Earth to mitigate the effects of climate change.
None of the scientists are endorsing the strategy, which is sometimes referred to as “solar geoengineering” and could have significant negative side effects.
The scientists also emphasize that solar geoengineering is not a solution. Greenhouse gas emissions must be immediately and urgently reduced, as that’s the only permanent way to limit global warming.
The signatories come from prestigious institutions around the world, including Columbia University, Harvard University, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and NASA. There is no organization or institution behind the letter, however. It was published as an independent effort by scientists.”
“An effort to co-opt this natural cooling ability of aerosols has long been considered a potential last-ditch, desperate shot at slowing down global warming. The promise of planet-cooling technology has also been touted by techno-optimists, Silicon Valley types and politicians who aren’t keen on the government doing anything to curb emissions. “Geoengineering holds forth the promise of addressing global warming concerns for just a few billion dollars a year,” wrote Newt Gingrich in an attack on proposed cap-and-trade legislation back in 2008.
But there’s a catch. Our surplus of aerosols is a huge problem for those of us who like to breathe air. At high concentrations, these tiny particles are one of the deadliest substances in existence, burrowing deep into our bodies where they can damage hearts and lungs.”
Rolling Stone, Devil’s Bargain: Why Aerosols Pose a Deadly Climate Change Threat
“It sounds like something out of science fiction: A country suffering from heat, flooding or crop failures decides on its own to send out a fleet of aircraft to spray a fine, sun-blocking mist into the earth’s atmosphere, reducing temperatures and providing relief to parched populations. Other countries view it as a threat to their own citizens and ready a military response.
But members of the U.S. intelligence community and other national security officials were worried enough last year to plot how to avert a war triggered by this kind of climate engineering…
The practice, known as solar geoengineering, is theoretically possible. And as the world’s most vulnerable populations suffer more sharply from rising temperatures, global decision-makers will likely come under heavy pressure to deploy the technology, scientists and policymakers say. Compared to other methods to combat the effects of climate change, it’s likely to be cheaper and faster.
Because the technique could weaken the sun’s power across the globe — not just above whichever country decided to deploy it — security officials are concerned about the potential to spark conflict, since a single capital could make decisions that shape the entire world’s fate…
The science is evolving, said Goodman, a longtime expert on the intersection of climate change and security. But global discussions haven’t kept up, leaving a powerful technology largely unregulated internationally.
“It could be weaponized by a country to either try to improve the climate and reduce the temperatures in their own location or against an adversary,” Goodman said. “It could be threatened in a way that could cause fear or panic among populations.’”
Washington Post, A ‘climate solution’ that spies worry could trigger war
“The Mexican government said it will develop a strategy to ban future experimentation with solar geoengineering.
“Mexico reiterates its unavoidable commitment to the protection and well-being of the population from practices that generate risks to human and environmental security,” said the government in a statement…
James Haywood is a professor of atmospheric science at Exeter University and co-wrote the recent UN report on SAI. He told Climate Home that Make Sunsets experiment was not dangerous as the amount of sulphur was so small.
“It is more of a [public relations] stunt,” he said, adding “it’s not going to make a blind bit of difference”.
But putting larger amounts of sulphur in the atmosphere can be dangerous, he said. While many of the side-effects of SAI can be avoided if it is done properly, he said, some are very difficult to avoid.
For example, he said, putting large amounts of sulphur into the atmosphere is likely to increase winter rainfall over northern Europe and reduce it over southern Europe, particularly in Spain and Portugal.
Speaking before the Mexican statement, Haywood said that at the moment there “is no government, no governance” of geoengineering and that he wasn’t aware of any governments proposing regulations.
Ciel [Center for International Environmental Law] called on more governments to announce bans on the practice.”
Climate Home News, Mexico plans to ban solar geoengineering after rogue experiment
“Within the next 18 months, a Palo Alto–based startup wants to begin releasing a small quantity of iron-rich particles into the exhaust stream of a shipping vessel crossing the open ocean.
Blue Dot Change hopes to determine whether the particles will accelerate the destruction of methane, one of the most powerful greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. If it works, the four-person company hopes to begin spraying the particles on commercial scales within a year after that, says David Henkel-Wallace, the founder and chief executive.
The business is among a handful of small commercial ventures that are itching to test whether releasing similar particles could curb climate change, mimicking a phenomenon that some believe may have amplified ice ages. At least two other firms have also proposed outdoor experiments to evaluate this approach, MIT Technology Review has found.
There’s increasing academic work exploring this concept as well, driven by growing climate concerns and rising emissions of methane, which exerts about 85 times the warming effect of carbon dioxide over a 20 year-period. But most scientists in this area stress that the iron idea is speculative, limited so far to early lab and modeling work. Little is known about other effects that releasing the particles could cause, including potentially dangerous ones. And some argue that for-profit efforts to intervene in such a complex, little-understood area is rash and counterproductive at this stage.”
MIT Technology Review, These startups hope to spray iron particles above the ocean to fight climate change
“The Union of Concerned Scientists opposes the deployment of solar geoengineering because it poses unacceptably high environmental, social, and geopolitical risks. Instead, UCS supports continued modeling research, observational studies, and strong, inclusive public participation in decision-making over whether and how further research should include possible small-scale outdoor experiments.”
Union of Concerned Scientists, What Is Solar Geoengineering? How does it work, what are the risks, and why should we study it?
More reading