Pollution, climate change and technology

Mount Pinatubo erupted in 1991, becoming the second largest volcanic eruption of the 20th century. Its ash plume dispersed aerosol particles globally, causing temperatures to drop by half a degree Celsius for almost two years. Other major eruptions have had similar effects. Scientists are exploring whether we can replicate this phenomenon using solar geoengineering to fight global warming. Supporters believe this.

Critics argue that the risks of solar geoengineering outweigh its rewards in fighting global warming. More technology is not always better, and some inventions are regrettable. To fully understand the benefits and risks of solar geoengineering, I interviewed scientists, lawyers, and indigenous leaders with strong opinions on both sides. The stakes are high, as the survival of the human race on Earth is at risk.

Despite the debate, scientists agree that solar geoengineering could cool down the planet by reflecting sunlight away from the Earth. The most commonly researched approach is injecting aerosols into the stratosphere, mimicking the effects of volcanoes tool is worth exploring as climate change worsens and we seek ways to reduce suffering. Scientists are exploring ways to brighten marine clouds and use reflective shields in outer space to cool the planet. These methods are still in the research phase and would require massive interference with the complex climate to be effective. Some scientists support solar geoengineering because emissions, mainly carbon dioxide, keep rising and cutting them to zero tomorrow wouldn't eliminate climate risk. University of Chicago professor David Keith explains that unless we think beyond emission reduction, climate change impacts will continue to worsen.

A recent study showed that extreme weather accounted for nearly 10% of all global deaths and shows an increase in heat related ones. To mitigate those effects supporters argue that we need to explore climate processes use computer modeling, and develop technology to figure out if and maybe how this technology could safely be deployed globally along with other solutions. The thing is, messing with our global climate is very complicated. The whole climate system is wired together. People could, technologically speaking, create major...unpredictable changes in the way the climate system responds. Oxford Professor Raymond Pierre Humbert is referencing one of the big concerns about solar geoengineering. Adding new elements into our atmosphere extreme weather we're already experiencing due to climate change. Nearly everyone agrees on these risks.

You can't answer important questions about climate system response without a full scale deployment. This would require unprecedented global cooperation in terms of scale and time. Carbon dioxide emissions will continue to warm the climate for thousands of years, even if we stop emitting. Solar geoengineering techniques have a short lifetime in the atmosphere and require constant deployment for centuries to maintain a cooling effect. This puts an unprecedented burden on future humanity. If solar geoengineering is suddenly terminated, the world could experience rapid warming, known as termination shock. Critics believe solar geoengineering is ungovernable and unsustainable due to this risk.

We haven't done well at moving forward. Sweden rejected a solar geoengineering project due to concerns about unpredictable environmental changes and geopolitical tensions. This opposition is why most research is done in labs with simulations. Scientists have called for a non-use agreement on solar geoengineering, including no outdoor experiments, no public funding, and no support from international institutions. Professor Pierre Humbert, a signatory, supports low-risk research on fundamental climate processes without developing deployment technology

Solar geoengineering is a controversial topic. Some people worry that computer simulations and modeling will lead to full-scale deployment. However, simulations are useful for overall science. Technology development leading to deployment is opposed by many. Lili Fuhr from the Center for International Environmental Law agrees. Once a technology is developed, it will likely be used. In 2023, 110 scientists supported more research into solar geoengineering. They want a scientific assessment, including experiments to advance technology. They do not support the use of this technology. We cannot control the future and prevent the use of these technologies.

People who want to reduce emissions may exploit solar geoengineering. However, agreeing on the issue doesn't mean agreeing on the path forward. This is a political concern, not an ethical one. Mexico has banned solar geoengineering experiments, but the US is developing a research plan. Climate organizations are making assessments and recommendations, but it's unclear which is right. Despite differing opinions, everyone cares deeply about our planet's future. The tension between them can make us more thoughtful and rigorous in solving this mess.