Print Friendly and PDF
Pete Myers: The existential trap of solar geoengineering

Pete Myers: The existential trap of solar geoengineering

Once deployed, geoengineering gives excuses to avoid reducing carbon emissions.

0 min read

We need to be very wary before we deploy any effort to create a man-made chemical sunshade to deflect a harmful rise in global temperatures.


Veteran Reuters reporter Alister Doyle published an intriguing story on research into "solar geo-engineering," which would mimic big volcanic eruptions that can cool the Earth by masking the sun with a veil of ash.

That research is now dominated by rich nations and universities such as Harvard and Oxford. But there are some serious caveats we must consider before going too far down this path.

What happens if we turn the sunshade off?

With so much at risk from climate change, scientists in developing nations understandably argue they must be at the table as these technologies are explored for their benefits and costs (see commentary in Nature). This story from Reuters explores an initiative, the Solar Radiation Management Governance Initiative (SRMGI.org) that is facilitating developing nation engagement in assessing solar geoengineering.

Let's hope their deliberations encompass the existential threat these technologies pose: Once employed, they give excuses to avoid reducing carbon emissions. Yet once they are deployed, what happens if major societal disruptions bring them to a halt (for example, if financial collapse means there are no longer resources to pay for them)? The pent-up pressure of carbon emissions that were permitted to enter the atmosphere because of the promise of solar geoengineering will likely rapidly assert their impact on global temperatures. Any assessment of solar geoengineering must examine this endgame.

There are other obvious risks, most especially that solar geoengineering to lessen temperature increases does nothing to prevent further accumulation of carbon dioxide in the oceans and fresh water bodies, exacerbating acidification.

That's well-known. But there are undoubtedly many unknown unknowns that will put into play be playing with solar geoengineering.

Read the full Reuters report here.

About the author(s):

Pete Myers

Pete Myers is the founder and chief scientist of Environmental Health Sciences, publisher of EHN.org and DailyClimate.org

Become a donor
Today's top news

Opinion: Supreme Court undoing 50 years’ worth of environmental progress

The Supreme Court has taken a brazen anti-regulatory turn. It’s our planet and health that will suffer.

EHN reporter wins Golden Quill awards for reporting on petrochemicals and PFAS

Kristina Marusic was presented with two awards for her coverage of the oil and gas and plastics industries in western Pennsylvania.

From our newsroom

Recycling plastics “extremely problematic” due to toxic chemical additives: Report

Negotiations are underway for a global plastics treaty and parties differ on the role of recycling.

Reimagining healthcare to reduce pollution, tackle climate change and center justice

“We need to understand who is harmed by an economy that’s based on fossil fuels and toxic chemicals.”

Opinion: UN plastics treaty should prioritize health and climate change

Delegates should push for a treaty that takes a full-lifecycle approach to plastic pollution.

LISTEN: Nsilo Berry on making buildings healthier

“When it comes to healthy materials, I like to advocate for solutions that become sensible and viable.”

Op-ed: Reducing soil toxics in community gardens

How different groups engaged in community gardens can cultivate partnerships and practices to reduce harmful chemical exposures.