Scientific advisers to the European Commission are calling for an EU-wide ban on efforts to artificially cool the Earth through solar geoengineering. This includes controversial technologies used to reflect sunlight back into space, primarily by sending reflective particles into the atmosphere or by brightening clouds.
Proponents argue that this could help in the fight against climate change, especially as planet-warming greenhouse gas emissions continue to rise. But small-scale experiments have begun to respond to concerns that these technologies may do more harm than good.
Experiments have begun to respond to concerns that these technologies may do more harm than good.
The opinion written by the GCSA states that there is “insufficient scientific evidence” to show that solar geoengineering can actually prevent climate change.
“Given the very high levels of scientific and technological uncertainty at present, as well as the potential harmful uses, we advocate a moratorium on all large-scale developments.” [solar geoengineering] Use and deployment,” EGE writes in a second much-anticipated opinion.
According to the GCSA, solar geoengineering only attempts to tackle “the symptoms rather than the root causes of climate change”. Greenhouse gas emissions, including carbon dioxide, from fossil fuels are warming the planet. Attempts to artificially cool the Earth do not stop that pollution from increasing, nor does it cure other serious consequences. The oceans are becoming more acidic Because they absorb excess CO2. The GCSA says it could also cause unexpected problems, including changing rainfall patterns or affecting food production and solar energy production.
The tactic that has received the most attention so far involves copying the method Volcanic eruption temporarily cools planet Sulfur dioxide spews into the stratosphere, creating a reflective haze. But sulfur dioxide use can also be considered a pollutant that can irritate people's lungs, cause acid rain, and potentially deplete the Antarctic ozone hole.
These experiments were probably too small to have any major impact on climate. Nevertheless, the company Tried to sell “cooling credits” At $10 per gram of sulfur dioxide for anyone interested in trying to offset their carbon emissions. The GCSA opinion says the European Commission should “oppose” the use of cooling credits from solar geoengineering.
Lawmakers face the prospect of more rogue experiments Pressure to create stronger international rules, Governing body of the UN Convention on Biological Diversity adopts bans on large-scale geoengineering in 2010But this discounts small-scale experiments. Now, the European Commission's scientific advisers recommend a more explicit EU-wide moratorium. It also recommends setting the stage for a new international treaty on solar geoengineering and says the EU should advocate for the deployment of such technologies globally for the “foreseeable future”.
some have happened Cautious efforts to fund legitimate research In solar geoengineering, however, this is probably limited to laboratories and computer models. recent harvard canceled plans To conduct an outdoor test flight in Sweden after facing opposition from indigenous Sami leaders, who said they were not consulted about the experiment. Its scientific advisers say the European Commission should assess new research on solar geoengineering every five to 10 years.
“These technologies show some promise, but they are far from mature,” Ekaterina Zaharieva, Commissioner for Startups, Research and Innovation, said in a statement. statement Today. “Research should continue, but the opinion of the European Group on Ethics suggests that research must be rigorous and ethical, and take full account of the potential range of direct and indirect effects.”