The EU Takes a Stance on Geoengineering
In a significant move, the European Commission has addressed the controversial topic of geoengineering for the first time. Geoengineering refers to the scientific and technological interventions aimed at manipulating the Earth’s climate to combat the effects of climate change. The European Commission’s draft document calls for international efforts to assess the risks and uncertainties associated with climate action, including the manipulation of solar radiation, and to establish global regulations on the matter.
Acknowledging the Growing Interest in Geoengineering
The European Commission’s statement marks a significant milestone as it is the first time a national or regional governing body has officially acknowledged the increasing interest in the field of geoengineering. This acknowledgment suggests that there is a growing concern among governing bodies regarding the ability to keep global warming within the target of 1.5°C. As a result, there is a need to explore alternative measures, including geoengineering, to mitigate the adverse effects of climate change.
Exploring Controversial Techniques
One of the most controversial techniques in geoengineering is stratospheric aerosol injection. This process involves releasing micron-sized particles into the stratosphere to reflect sunlight and cool the Earth. Although no aircraft capable of carrying such loads to the required altitude have been built yet, the technique has the potential to replicate the cooling effects of volcanic eruptions, such as the Mount Pinatubo eruption in 1991, which led to a global cooling of 0.3°C to 0.5°C for the subsequent two years.
Beyond stratospheric aerosol injection, there are other methods being researched, such as thinning cirrus clouds to allow more infrared rays to escape the atmosphere and even throwing umbrellas into space. These techniques are still in the early stages of development and remain ungoverned.
The Risks and Uncertainties of Geoengineering
While geoengineering holds promise as a potential solution to combat climate change, there are significant risks and uncertainties associated with its implementation. One major concern is the potential damage to the ozone layer and the redistribution of the impacts of climate change across different ecosystems. Furthermore, abrupt cessation of geoengineering efforts could lead to a sudden recurrence of global warming, exacerbating the problem.
The United Nations Environment Program has described geoengineering as the “only” short-term solution to cool the planet. However, the program cautions that the costs of implementing medium-to-large-scale geoengineering projects could amount to tens of billions of US dollars annually for a mere 1°C cooling. This high cost, coupled with the potential dangers, renders large-scale implementation “ill-advised” at this stage.
International Efforts to Regulate Geoengineering
With the acknowledgment of the potential risks and uncertainties associated with geoengineering, the European Commission’s draft document calls for international efforts to regulate the field. A resolution on assessing geoengineering technologies failed at the United Nations Environment Assembly in 2019. However, with the backing of countries like Switzerland, Mexico, Burkina Faso, and South Korea, there is increasing momentum for establishing governance mechanisms to oversee geoengineering projects.
The Importance of Reducing Emissions
While geoengineering technologies hold promise, it is essential to emphasize that they should not detract from efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The primary focus should always be on reducing our carbon footprint and transitioning to renewable energy sources. Geoengineering should be viewed as a complementary measure rather than a substitute for emission reduction strategies.
The Need for Rapid Research
Despite the potential risks and uncertainties, some experts argue that rapid research in the field of geoengineering is crucial. Matthias Honegger, a senior research scientist at Perspectives Climate Research, emphasizes the need to establish beyond a reasonable doubt that geoengineering is not extremely dangerous. He highlights the necessity of limiting the damage and suffering caused by climate impacts through research and innovation.
Conclusion
The EU’s foray into geoengineering marks an important step in addressing the challenges posed by climate change. While the field of geoengineering offers potential solutions to mitigate global warming, there are significant risks and uncertainties that need to be carefully considered. International collaboration and regulation are essential to ensure the responsible and well-informed implementation of geoengineering techniques.
Additional Piece:
Exploring the Role of Geoengineering in Climate Change Mitigation
The concept of geoengineering is a topic that elicits both intrigue and controversy. As the effects of climate change become increasingly dire, scientists and policymakers are grappling with the question of whether intentionally manipulating the Earth’s climate can offer a viable solution. While there is no denying the pressing need to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, the urgency to explore alternative strategies has fueled interest in geoengineering.
Geoengineering refers to deliberate interventions in the Earth’s systems to counteract the effects of climate change. These interventions can take various forms, from modifying solar radiation to removing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. Proponents argue that geoengineering could provide a much-needed lifeline in the face of rapidly escalating climate impacts. However, critics warn of the potential risks and unintended consequences that could arise from tampering with complex planetary systems.
One area of geoengineering that has garnered significant attention is solar radiation management. By reflecting a portion of the sun’s rays back into space, proponents argue that we can reduce the Earth’s temperature and mitigate some of the adverse effects of climate change. Techniques such as stratospheric aerosol injection, marine cloud brightening, and space-based reflectors have been proposed as potential methods to achieve this.
Critics, on the other hand, raise concerns about the unknown side effects of such interventions. Altering solar radiation could disrupt weather patterns, impact agricultural systems, and have unforeseen consequences for ecosystems. Moreover, the potential geopolitical implications of controlling solar radiation raise questions about the equitable distribution of costs and benefits among nations.
Another area of geoengineering is carbon dioxide removal (CDR), which involves actively removing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. Methods under exploration include direct air capture, enhanced weathering, and afforestation. CDR offers the potential to not only reduce atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations but also to reverse the damage caused by centuries of carbon emissions.
However, implementing large-scale CDR projects raises a host of technical, economic, and ethical challenges. The energy requirements of direct air capture technologies, for instance, could offset the carbon benefits if not powered by renewable energy sources. Moreover, questions arise about land use and competition for resources in afforestation efforts.
Geoengineering also sits at the intersection of science and governance. The lack of an international regulatory framework leaves the field largely ungoverned, with haphazard research and experimentation taking place. The potential for unilateral action by a single nation raises concerns about unintended consequences and unequal distribution of risks.
To navigate the complexities of geoengineering, interdisciplinary research and stakeholder engagement are critical. Scientists, policymakers, ethicists, and civil society organizations must work together to assess the viability, risks, and potential benefits of different geoengineering techniques. Public debates and deliberative processes should inform decision-making to ensure transparency and accountability.
As we explore the potential of geoengineering, it is crucial to approach the topic with caution and humility. The Earth’s systems are incredibly complex, and the unintended consequences of tampering with them could far outweigh any perceived benefits. Geoengineering should not be seen as a silver bullet but rather as a last resort, complementing emission reductions and adaptation efforts.
Summary:
In a groundbreaking move, the European Commission has addressed the controversial topic of geoengineering and called for international efforts to assess its risks and uncertainties. Geoengineering involves deliberately manipulating the Earth’s climate to mitigate the effects of climate change. Techniques like stratospheric aerosol injection and carbon dioxide removal have been under exploration. While proponents argue that geoengineering could offer a lifeline to combat climate change, critics raise concerns about potential negative consequences. The lack of an international regulatory framework adds further complexity to the field. As we delve into geoengineering, it is crucial to proceed with caution, prioritize emission reductions, and engage in interdisciplinary research and stakeholder discussions.
—————————————————-
| Article | Link |
|---|---|
| UK Artful Impressions | Premiere Etsy Store |
| Sponsored Content | View |
| 90’s Rock Band Review | View |
| Ted Lasso’s MacBook Guide | View |
| Nature’s Secret to More Energy | View |
| Ancient Recipe for Weight Loss | View |
| MacBook Air i3 vs i5 | View |
| You Need a VPN in 2023 – Liberty Shield | View |
Receive free updates on climate change
We will send you a myFT Daily Digest email rounding last Climate change news every morning.
The EU has entered the controversial debate on geoengineering for the first time, a controversial technology that involves manipulating the weather to combat climate change.
The European Commission on Wednesday will call for international efforts to assess “the risks and uncertainties of climate action, including changing solar radiation” and to research how to regulate it globally, according to a draft document seen by the Financial Times.
The statement will be the first time a national or regional governing body has officially acknowledged the growing interest in a science that essentially involves interfering with weather patterns to cool the earth.
Among the more controversial techniques is a process called stratospheric aerosol injection which would involve flying a vehicle about 20-25km above the earth’s surface, shooting off micron-sized particles that reflect the sun.
No aircraft capable of carrying such loads to that height have yet been built. But the process is calculated to have results similar to volcanic eruptions, such as that of Mount Pinatubo in the Philippines in 1991, whose clouds of material led to an average global cooling of 0.3°C to 0.5°C for the two subsequent years, according to the United Nations Environment Programme.
Other methods being researched include thinning cirrus clouds to allow more infrared rays to leave the atmosphere and throwing umbrellas into space.
The EU text, which is not legally binding and could still change before publication, shows the extent of concern that humanity will not be able to keep global warming within the target of 1.5°C.
Geoengineering can also refer to carbon capture and storage, which is scaled up as a means of eliminating emissions from the air.
All of these methods, which are still in embryonic stages of development, remain ungoverned. An effort — led by Switzerland and supported by a dozen countries including Mexico, Burkina Faso and South Korea — to get a resolution on assessing geoengineering technologies adopted at the United Nations Environment Assembly failed in 2019.
In its most recent report on so-called ‘solar radiation management’ – which includes different techniques for regulating the sun’s rays – the United Nations Environment Program described the technology as the ‘only’ way to cool the planet in the short term.
But, the authors caution, several factors, including costs that could amount to “tens of billions of US dollars annually for 1C cooling,” have made medium-to-large-scale implementation “ill-advised.”
Interfering with the globe’s natural climate could damage the ozone layer, redistribute the impact of climate change across ecosystems, cause geopolitical tensions and, if stopped abruptly, cause a sudden recurrence of global warming that would be more acute and dangerous, warns the relationship.
The scientists are also keen to point out that climate-altering technologies shouldn’t detract from efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions overall.
Matthias Honegger, senior research scientist at Perspectives Climate Research, said if a country decides to implement methods to alter the sun’s rays, it could get it “within a few years,” which is why “such an emphasis is placed on rapid research in this” .
The guiding principle of the current research was that “one must establish beyond a reasonable doubt that it is not extremely dangerous.” He added that the commission which focused solely on the potential risks was “unfortunate. . . When [its] the real raison d’être is to limit the damage and suffering caused by ever-growing climate impacts”.
The commission declined to comment on the draft document.
Climate capital
Where climate change meets business, markets and politics. Explore the coverage of the FT here.
Are you curious about the FT’s environmental sustainability commitments? Learn more about our scientific goals here
https://www.ft.com/content/8196059a-ecdf-4615-9f5d-ed1d4ab70cbd
—————————————————-