A $370 Million Road Map for Solar Geoengineering—and the Fight Over Who Decides
Detailed report on the use of solar geoengineering
Reflective, a San Francisco nonprofit, released a detailed road map for solar geoengineering research. If coordinated, the work would take about a decade and cost $370 million; otherwise, 20 years and $1.4 billion. The plan includes outdoor experiments releasing sulfur dioxide into the stratosphere, a controversial step opposed by hundreds of academics who demand a non-use agreement. Critics argue the core question isn't technical but political: who controls a planet-altering technology?
The core question is: Who would control a planet-altering technology like stratospheric aerosol injection? Who would develop it, and who would deploy it, and to what end? To serve what purposes, and whose purposes? Those questions are very fundamental, because this planet-altering technology will have winners and losers.
- willis936
This is a great article. I'm glad to see this sentiment is finally starting to gain traction:
>She fears that the rising dangers of climate change will put growing pressure on nations and other actors to move forward with solar geoengineering, even if no one has done the necessary research to reduce scientific uncertainty and sort out the technical challenges.
>“We don’t think the alternative is decisions not happening at all,” she says. “We think the alternative is decisions being made in a panic or on lack of evidence.”
Unfortunately the article ends on that point and we don't get the rebuttal of the lofty idyllic academics or fearful policymakers.
- ZeroGravitas
I'd like to see more open discussion of blockading and bombing uncooperative country's fossil fuel supply chains once decarbonization is in full swing.
And get wide global agreement that anyone geoengineering when they are still pumping oil is effectively declaring war on other countries and so attacks on their pipelines or ports are considered a counter strike.
- dv_dt
Setting out on a major geo engineering project is a folly or a cynical PR greenwash - maybe both. Anything to avoid change to entrenched interests. We already have a highly viable path to transition to Renewable power while optimizing all sorts of sustainability loops.