A statement by the U.N.-convened group suggests that tinkering with the atmosphere could be necessary to meet climate goals
Attempts to counter global warming by modifying Earth’s atmosphere have been thrust into the spotlight following last week’s report from the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).
Mention of ‘geoengineering’ in the report summary was brief, but it suggests that the controversial area is now firmly on the scientific agenda. Some climate models suggest that geoengineering may even be necessary to keep global temperature rises to below 2 °C above pre-industrial levels.
Most geoengineering technologies generally either reflect sunlight — through artificial ‘clouds’ of stratospheric aerosols, for example — or reduce the amount of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. The latter approach, described as ‘negative emissions’, involves capturing carbon dioxide with strategies that range from building towers to collect it from the atmosphere to grinding up rocks to react with CO2 and take it out of circulation.
Critics say that the technologies are unproven, will have unforeseen impacts and could distract from attempts to limit emissions of greenhouse gases. But advocates point to language in the summary for policy-makers produced by the IPCC working group that assessed the scientific evidence for climate change as evidence that reducing emissions will not be enough.
The document notes that a “large fraction” of anthropogenic climate change is irreversible except with a “large net removal of CO2 from the atmosphere over a sustained period”. Under some climate models, keeping temperature rise below 2 °C will require negative emissions.
The summary reads: “Methods that aim to deliberately alter the climate system to counter climate change, termed geoengineering, have been proposed. Limited evidence precludes a comprehensive quantitative assessment of both Solar Radiation Management (SRM) and Carbon Dioxide Removal (CDR) and their impact on the climate system.”
Piers Forster, a climate-change researcher at the University of Leeds, UK, and one of the authors of the summary, says: “The policy relevance of the information is that if you do not start mitigating [ie reducing emissions] tomorrow we will have to start to consider these unattractive options.”
The Latest on: Geoengineering
- Harvard research could shed light on geoengineeringon November 12, 2019 at 4:02 am
But cutting pollution from the world’s energy system takes time, so some suggest that we also need to consider geoengineering the climate to cool it down. This drastic approach is very controversial.
- Getting geoengineering back-to-fronton November 12, 2019 at 1:43 am
A response to After Geoengineering by Holly Jean Buck. We need to talk about geoengineering. Badly. To do so, I suggest two ground rules. First, when we imagine futures with geoengineering, whether ...
- Current proposals to plant trees are misguidedon November 11, 2019 at 12:56 am
But is it being thought through sufficiently? I think not. In recent years, the neighborly act of planting a tree in the backyard has morphed into major geoengineering projects marketed as key ...
- Glacier geoengineering proposed to mitigate sea level riseon November 7, 2019 at 4:12 pm
Geoengineering methods have been proposed in the past as a way to reduce the impact greenhouse gases have on rising global temperatures, and thus ice melt. Capturing carbon from the atmosphere and ...
- Are the climate kids right?on November 6, 2019 at 8:39 pm
Yes and no. The world – particularly the United States – needs a wake-up call. Our false sense of comfort – encouraged by disingenuous narratives about geoengineering or other technological silver ...
- Geoengineering 101: An Introduction to a Dangerous Techno-Distractionon November 1, 2019 at 4:49 pm
An interview with program and research staff from the ETC Group regarding current dynamics around the surreptitious push by the fossil fuel industry and their political allies to advance ...
- Election 2020 Foreign Policy Roundup: Tim Ryan Bows Out, Warren on Israel, and Geoengineeringon October 25, 2019 at 2:08 pm
Blog posts represent the views of CFR fellows and staff and not those of CFR, which takes no institutional positions. Tim Ryan announced yesterday that he has ended his run for the White House, saying ...
- Can solar geoengineering save us from climate change?on October 18, 2019 at 5:45 am
One of my favourite quotes on using solar geoengineering to combat global warming comes from agricultural economist Jonathan Proctor. Speaking to The Atlantic in August 2018, he said: “You’re in an ...
- In a climate crisis, is geoengineering worth the risks?on October 6, 2019 at 5:09 am
Geoengineering ideas — tinkering with the climate to delay or halt the worst effects of global warming — have been around for decades. Few such ideas have progressed past the thought experiment stage, ...
- Why Solar Geoengineering May Be Our Only Hope To Reverse Global Warmingon September 10, 2019 at 3:01 am
Last Wednesday night, as I watched the climate discussions with each of the Democratic Party candidates on CNN’s Presidential Climate Town Hall, I kept asking, “Why is only Andrew Yang talking about ...
via Google News and Bing News