New Federal Report on Research Into Sun-Dimming Technologies Delivers More Questions Than Answers – Inside Climate News

Report: US Government Considers Solar Radiation Management Technologies

While hundreds of scientists around the world are urgently advocating for a non-use agreement for atmospheric sun-dimming experiments, the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy may be looking in a different direction. A June 30 report from the OSTP outlines, among other things, how to develop scenarios for deploying solar radiation management technologies like deliberately polluting the stratosphere with reflective particles, or spraying salt into coastal clouds to make them brighter and longer-lasting.

The Sustainable Development Goals and Solar Radiation Management

The use of solar radiation management technologies raises concerns about its compatibility with the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). These technologies do not address the drivers of human-induced climate change and fail to mitigate the effects of global warming on global agricultural production. Furthermore, they do not counteract dangerous ocean acidification and other negative effects of growing CO2 concentrations on land and ocean ecosystems. The deployment of solar radiation management could have significant impacts on the global hydrological cycle and global circulation patterns, such as monsoons, which could disrupt ecosystems and have adverse effects on vulnerable communities.

Cautionary Warnings from Climate Think Tanks

Several major climate think tanks and research institutions have issued warnings about the dangers of tinkering with the climate system. Climate Analytics released a missive in 2018 titled “Why Geoengineering is Not a Solution to the Climate Crisis,” highlighting the potential risks and limitations of geoengineering approaches. The Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research classified geoengineering as another type of “end-of-chimney fix” for human-caused global warming. These cautionary warnings emphasize the need for a precautionary approach and comprehensive research before considering the deployment of solar radiation management technologies.

Concerns about Normalization and Slippery Slope

Climate scientist Raymond Pierrehumbert raises concerns about the normalization of solar geoengineering and the potential slippery slope towards deployment. He highlights the need for a strong scientific case before considering the use of these technologies and warns against the influence of a vocal “pro-geoengineering camp.” Pierrehumbert is part of an effort to establish a global agreement to prevent the normalization of solar geoengineering.

Accelerated Studies and International Collaboration

Other climate experts argue that the risks of unchecked global warming warrant more study of solar radiation management to mitigate its impacts. A letter published in February 2023, signed by 110 scientists including James Hansen, calls for accelerated studies of technologies that could reflect sunlight away from the Earth. They emphasize the importance of a rigorous scientific assessment of the feasibility and impacts of solar radiation management approaches. International collaboration is crucial for research and governance, as any deployment of solar radiation management would have cross-border impacts.

Implications for Society and Governance Challenges

The OSTP report emphasizes the need for full consideration of the implications for society and governance challenges associated with solar radiation management. Environmental justice, geopolitical stability, climate policy, risk tolerance, and public perception are among the societal concerns that should be addressed. The report calls for international collaboration on research and governance to ensure effective global control and democratic decision-making under the watchful eyes of the United Nations.

Course Correction and Research Gaps

The report is seen as a form of course correction, acknowledging the need for further research on solar geoengineering’s impacts on food and water systems, ecosystem services, and environmental justice. It highlights research gaps and the importance of genuine international cooperation in addressing these gaps. The report aims to put brakes on an aggressive push for solar radiation management deployment and emphasizes the importance of a cautious and comprehensive approach.

Political Momentum and Geoengineering Advocates

The political momentum for further geoengineering research has been building, with some advocates pushing for its advancement. Efforts to boost geoengineering research include legislative resolutions and calls for improved measurement and assessment capabilities. However, concerns remain about the influence of a small group of advocates and the potential decoupling of scientific facts from political decision-making.

Historical Context and Cautionary Tale

The history of weather modification and cloud-seeding serves as a cautionary tale for the potential risks of hasty adoption of geoengineering technologies. The recent framing of solar geoengineering as a response to global warming can be traced back to a 2006 paper by Paul Crutzen. However, discussions on geoengineering as a potential response to climate change have been ongoing for more than 50 years, predating the consideration of emissions reductions as a policy option.

Conclusion

The OSTP report on solar radiation management technologies highlights the need for comprehensive research, international collaboration, and a precautionary approach. It raises concerns about the compatibility of these technologies with the Sustainable Development Goals and emphasizes the importance of addressing societal implications and governance challenges. While there are differing opinions on the use of solar geoengineering, further research and informed decision-making are necessary before considering their deployment.

SDGs, Targets, and Indicators Analysis

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

• SDG 13: Climate Action
• SDG 14: Life Below Water
• SDG 15: Life on Land

The article discusses the potential deployment of solar radiation management technologies and geoengineering interventions to address climate change. These interventions have implications for climate action (SDG 13) as they aim to mitigate the effects of global warming. Additionally, the article mentions the risks of ocean acidification and negative effects on land and ocean ecosystems, which are relevant to SDG 14 (Life Below Water) and SDG 15 (Life on Land).

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

• Target 13.1: Strengthen resilience and adaptive capacity to climate-related hazards and natural disasters
• Target 14.3: Minimize and address the impacts of ocean acidification
• Target 15.1: Ensure conservation, restoration, and sustainable use of terrestrial and inland freshwater ecosystems
• Target 15.5: Take urgent and significant action to reduce degradation of natural habitats

The article highlights the need to address the risks and impacts of climate interventions, including potential changes in global rainfall patterns and effects on ecosystems. These align with Target 13.1 under SDG 13. The mention of ocean acidification connects to Target 14.3 under SDG 14, which focuses on minimizing its impacts. The discussion of potential effects on land and ocean ecosystems relates to Target 15.1 and Target 15.5 under SDG 15, which emphasize the conservation, restoration, and sustainable use of ecosystems.

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

• Indicator for Target 13.1: Number of countries with national and local adaptation plans
• Indicator for Target 14.3: Average marine acidity (pH) measured at agreed sampling stations
• Indicator for Target 15.1: Proportion of important sites for terrestrial and freshwater biodiversity that are covered by protected areas
• Indicator for Target 15.5: Red List Index

The article does not explicitly mention indicators, but the identified targets can be measured using existing indicators. For Target 13.1, the number of countries with national and local adaptation plans can be used as an indicator to measure progress in strengthening resilience and adaptive capacity. The average marine acidity (pH) measured at agreed sampling stations can serve as an indicator for Target 14.3, reflecting progress in minimizing the impacts of ocean acidification. The proportion of important sites for biodiversity covered by protected areas can be used as an indicator for Target 15.1, while the Red List Index can measure progress in reducing degradation of natural habitats (Target 15.5).

Table: SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

Behold! This splendid article springs forth from the wellspring of knowledge, shaped by a wondrous proprietary AI technology that delved into a vast ocean of data, illuminating the path towards the Sustainable Development Goals. Remember that all rights are reserved by SDG Investors LLC, empowering us to champion progress together.

Source: insideclimatenews.org

Join us, as fellow seekers of change, on a transformative journey at https://sdgtalks.ai/welcome, where you can become a member and actively contribute to shaping a brighter future.