No abstract

Advancing solar geoengineering research is associated with multiple hidden injustices that are revealed by addressing three questions: Who is conducting and funding solar geoengineering research? How do those advocating for solar geoengineering research think about social justice and social change? How is this technology likely to be deployed? Navigating these questions reveals that solar geoengineering research is being advocated for by a small group of primarily white men at elite institutions in the Global North, funded largely by billionaires or their philanthropic arms, who are increasingly adopting militarized approaches and logics. Solar geoengineering research advances an extreme, expert–elite technocratic intervention into the global climate system that would serve to further concentrate contemporary forms of political and economic power. For these reasons, we argue that it is unethical and unjust to advance solar geoengineering research.

Solar geoengineering technologies intended to slow climate change by injecting sulfate aerosols into the stratosphere are gaining traction in climate policy. Solar geoengineering is considered "fast, cheap, and imperfect" in that it could rapidly reduce planetary temperatures with low cost technology, but potentially generate catastrophic consequences for climate, weather, and biodiversity. Governance has therefore been central to solar geoengineering debates, particularly the question of unilateral deployment, whereby a state or group of states could deploy the technology against the wishes of the international community. In this context, recent, influential scenarios posit that – given technological and political complexities – solar geoengineering deployment will likely be guided by a "logic of multilateralism." I challenge this assertion by arguing that solar geoengineering is defined by equally compelling 'logics of militarization.' I detail recent involvement in solar geoengineering development on the part of U.S. defense, intelligence, and foreign policy institutions, geoengineering scenarios that adopt militarized logics and expertise, and Realist international relations theories that undergird leading governance scenarios. I then demonstrate that the U.S. military has a strategic interest in solar geoengineering, as U.S. hegemony is predicated on expanding fossil fuels, but the military deems climate change a threat to national security. The unique spatio-temporal qualities of solar geoengineering can bridge the gap between these contradictory positions. In examining the militarization of solar geoengineering, I aim to ground recent conceptions of "planetary sovereignty" in the emergent field of "geopolitical ecology" through the latter's more granular approach to the world-making powers of key geopolitical-ecological actors. Key Words: solar geoengineering, geopolitical ecology, militarization, U.S. hegemony, climate intervention

Once a fringe notion, solar geoengineering via Stratospheric Aerosol Injection (SAI) is gaining traction as a climate management tactic within mainstream institutions and factions of the climate justice movement. Cautious considerations of SAI are driven by the layered realities of climate urgency, political inaction, and the potential for climate impacts to harm the most vulnerable. This narrative is difficult to dispute, yet it originates from leading centers of SAI research—particularly the Harvard Solar Geoengineering Research Program (HSGRP)—that construct the “necessity” of research, experimentation, and potential deployment under ideological pretenses aimed at maintaining the hegemony of liberal-capitalism. Hence, advanced under the auspices of HSGRP, SAI would constitute a form of imperialism rather than a tool for climate justice. I link SAI to theories of capitalist imperialism, and situate HSGRP within Harvard’s legacy shaping U.S. imperialism and position as a nodal point of liberal-capitalist power. In this context, I identify three dominant ideologies undergirding SAI research at Harvard—ecomodernism, Realist International Relations theory, and Keynesianism—that construct a specific narrative whereby established climate solutions (liberal-capitalist ecomodernism) are frustrated by “anarchical” international politics, leaving the poor vulnerable to near-term climate impacts. SAI is thus positioned as a mechanism capable of buying time for market-driven policy and reducing near-term climate risk. HSGRP directly counter poses this approach to radical elements of the climate justice movement that address capitalism as the root cause of both climate change and global poverty.

The U.S. National Academies of Science, Engineering and Medicine (NASEM) 2021 report on solar geoengineering research is a political intervention in global climate politics. Although the NASEM report explicitly acknowledges the risks of unilateral research without broad-based public participation and global governance, the report minimizes these concerns by recommending that the U.S. act swiftly to establish a publicly funded national research program. By providing details for how the research program should be designed, the report contradicts its own recommendations for an inclusive and international process. By mainstreaming solar geoengineering, the report risks increasing the likelihood of international conflict and unilateral deployment, and further exacerbates delays in prioritizing other climate actions. Instead of expanding research on global manipulation of the earth's climate, the United States, like other countries around the world, should commit to multilateral, coordinated efforts to phase out fossil fuels, advance global climate action, and invest in climate justice. KEYWORDS Geoengineering; National Academies; climate action; climate justice Main text Once on the fringes of climate policy, solar geoengineering is gaining increased mainstream attention with the March 2021 release of a National Academies of Science, Engineering and Medicine (NASEM) report recommending that the U.S. government develop and fund a new solar geoengineering research program (NASEM 2021). Solar geoengineering refers to potential technological approaches to cooling the planet by reflecting CONTACT Jennie C Stephens