Geoengineering sounds like a quick climate fix, but without more research and guardrails, it's a costly gamble − with potentially harmful results
When soaring temperatures, extreme weather and catastrophic wildfires hit the headlines, people start asking for quick fixes to climate change.
- When soaring temperatures, extreme weather and catastrophic wildfires hit the headlines, people start asking for quick fixes to climate change.
- The U.S. government just announced the first awards from a US$3.5 billion fund for projects that promise to pull carbon dioxide out of the air.
- Policymakers are also exploring more invasive types of geoengineering − the deliberate, large-scale manipulation of Earth’s natural systems.
- The White House Office of Science and Technology Policy also discussed these concerns in its July 2023 research plan for investigating potential climate interventions.
Risks of solar radiation management
- When people hear the word “geoengineering,” they probably picture solar radiation management.
- These technologies, many of them still theoretical, aim to reflect solar energy away from Earth’s surface.
- While theoretically capable of cooling the planet, solar radiation management could have drastic side effects by shifting patterns of global atmospheric circulation that can lead to more extreme weather events.
- Space mirrors placed between the Sun and Earth could theoretically block 2% of incoming solar radiation and stabilize global temperature.
Removing carbon dioxide from the air
- Carbon dioxide removal technologies generally carry lower risks than manipulating solar energy.
- Carbon capture and storage removes carbon dioxide from power plants and factories and stores it underground in deep geological reservoirs.
- Direct air capture, designed to pull carbon out of the air, is still in its early stages but offers the advantage of being able to reduce existing levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.
- This, too, is costly, at upward of $600 per metric ton of carbon dioxide captured today, but innovators are getting funding from the U.S. government.
The legal void
- There’s a good chance that geoengineering meant to help one region would harm others.
- Right now, that’s a legal void.
- In the event of harm that crosses national boundaries, there is currently no clear path for recourse.
Striking the right balance
- Some forms of stratospheric aerosol injection might avoid the destruction of ozone and have short life spans in the atmosphere.
- However, more rigorous research, transparent global governance and robust legal and ethical frameworks to manage risks and ensure equity are needed first.
- As Riley Duren, a systems engineer from NASA, said in an interview with the space agency: “Geoengineering is not a cure.