Grimsvotn volcano erupts in Iceland in 2011. Solar radiation management schemes spray particles into the atmosphere to simulate cooling effects of volcanic eruptions. (Photograph: Egill Adalsteinsson/EPA)
Apr 01, 2013
Unproven and large-scale geoengineering schemes designed to offset the global warming impacts of greenhouse gas emissions should not be allowed without global consensus, say researchers in the UK.
And due to the profound dynamics of nature, say scientists at the Met Office Hadley Centre, efforts to manufacture planetary cooling--by spraying sulphate particles into the atmosphere, for example--could go "spectacularly wrong."
The researchers who modeled some of the scenarios of geoengineering found that though there is some hope that they could impact the atmosphere enough to drive down warming, the unintended consequences of such experiments could greatly harm other systems, especially in vulnerable or developing areas.
As The Guardian reports:
The dangers arose in projects that cooled the planet unevenly. In some cases these caused devastating droughts across Africa; in others they increased rainfall in the region but left huge areas of Brazil parched.
"The massive complexities associated with geoengineering, and the potential for winners and losers, means that some form of global governance is essential," said Jim Haywood at the Met Office's Hadley Centre in Exeter.
There is 'Get-out-of-jail-free card' when it comes to climate change.
Speaking to The Guardian, Matthew Watson, who leads the Spice project at Bristol University, said the team's study exposes the "dramatic consequences" of uninformed geoengineering. He continued:
"This paper tells us there are consequences for our actions whatever we do. There is no get-out-of-jail-free card[...]"
"Whatever we do is a compromise, and that compromise means there will be winners and losers. That opens massive ethical questions: who gets to decide how we even determine what is a good outcome for different people?
"How do you get a consensus with seven billion-plus stakeholders? If there was a decision to do geoengineering tomorrow, it would be done by white western men, and that isn't good."
_____________________
Join Us: News for people demanding a better world
Common Dreams is powered by optimists who believe in the power of informed and engaged citizens to ignite and enact change to make the world a better place. We're hundreds of thousands strong, but every single supporter makes the difference. Your contribution supports this bold media model—free, independent, and dedicated to reporting the facts every day. Stand with us in the fight for economic equality, social justice, human rights, and a more sustainable future. As a people-powered nonprofit news outlet, we cover the issues the corporate media never will. |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
Unproven and large-scale geoengineering schemes designed to offset the global warming impacts of greenhouse gas emissions should not be allowed without global consensus, say researchers in the UK.
And due to the profound dynamics of nature, say scientists at the Met Office Hadley Centre, efforts to manufacture planetary cooling--by spraying sulphate particles into the atmosphere, for example--could go "spectacularly wrong."
The researchers who modeled some of the scenarios of geoengineering found that though there is some hope that they could impact the atmosphere enough to drive down warming, the unintended consequences of such experiments could greatly harm other systems, especially in vulnerable or developing areas.
As The Guardian reports:
The dangers arose in projects that cooled the planet unevenly. In some cases these caused devastating droughts across Africa; in others they increased rainfall in the region but left huge areas of Brazil parched.
"The massive complexities associated with geoengineering, and the potential for winners and losers, means that some form of global governance is essential," said Jim Haywood at the Met Office's Hadley Centre in Exeter.
There is 'Get-out-of-jail-free card' when it comes to climate change.
Speaking to The Guardian, Matthew Watson, who leads the Spice project at Bristol University, said the team's study exposes the "dramatic consequences" of uninformed geoengineering. He continued:
"This paper tells us there are consequences for our actions whatever we do. There is no get-out-of-jail-free card[...]"
"Whatever we do is a compromise, and that compromise means there will be winners and losers. That opens massive ethical questions: who gets to decide how we even determine what is a good outcome for different people?
"How do you get a consensus with seven billion-plus stakeholders? If there was a decision to do geoengineering tomorrow, it would be done by white western men, and that isn't good."
_____________________
Unproven and large-scale geoengineering schemes designed to offset the global warming impacts of greenhouse gas emissions should not be allowed without global consensus, say researchers in the UK.
And due to the profound dynamics of nature, say scientists at the Met Office Hadley Centre, efforts to manufacture planetary cooling--by spraying sulphate particles into the atmosphere, for example--could go "spectacularly wrong."
The researchers who modeled some of the scenarios of geoengineering found that though there is some hope that they could impact the atmosphere enough to drive down warming, the unintended consequences of such experiments could greatly harm other systems, especially in vulnerable or developing areas.
As The Guardian reports:
The dangers arose in projects that cooled the planet unevenly. In some cases these caused devastating droughts across Africa; in others they increased rainfall in the region but left huge areas of Brazil parched.
"The massive complexities associated with geoengineering, and the potential for winners and losers, means that some form of global governance is essential," said Jim Haywood at the Met Office's Hadley Centre in Exeter.
There is 'Get-out-of-jail-free card' when it comes to climate change.
Speaking to The Guardian, Matthew Watson, who leads the Spice project at Bristol University, said the team's study exposes the "dramatic consequences" of uninformed geoengineering. He continued:
"This paper tells us there are consequences for our actions whatever we do. There is no get-out-of-jail-free card[...]"
"Whatever we do is a compromise, and that compromise means there will be winners and losers. That opens massive ethical questions: who gets to decide how we even determine what is a good outcome for different people?
"How do you get a consensus with seven billion-plus stakeholders? If there was a decision to do geoengineering tomorrow, it would be done by white western men, and that isn't good."
_____________________
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.