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)
Study: 'Get-Out-of-Jail-Free Card' Doesn't Exist for Climate Peril
Unintended consequences of geoengineering would harm world's most vulnerable
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."
_____________________
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, The U.S. is on a fast track to authoritarianism like nothing I've ever seen. Meanwhile, corporate news outlets are utterly capitulating to Trump, twisting their coverage to avoid drawing his ire while lining up to stuff cash in his pockets. That's why I believe that Common Dreams is doing the best and most consequential reporting that we've ever done. Our small but mighty team is a progressive reporting powerhouse, covering the news every day that the corporate media never will. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. And to ignite change for the common good. Now here's the key piece that I want all our readers to understand: None of this would be possible without your financial support. That's not just some fundraising cliche. It's the absolute and literal truth. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. The final deadline for our crucial Summer Campaign fundraising drive is just days away, and we’re falling short of our must-hit goal. Will you donate now to help power the nonprofit, independent reporting of Common Dreams? Thank you for being a vital member of our community. Together, we can keep independent journalism alive when it’s needed most. - Craig Brown, Co-founder |
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."
_____________________