The Dangers of Mainstreaming Solar Geoengineering: A critique of the National Academies Report

Abstract

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

Conspiracy spillovers and geoengineering

“…We add a methodological innovation here by categorising the NRC lexicon-driven emotion analysis by contextualising existing concerns, skepticism, oppositions, disagreements and controversies around SG that already have a strong negative stance ( 4 , 16 , 25 , 31 , 73 , 74 , 75 ). Thereby adding a supervised classification layer for domain adaptation.…”

Beyond Climate Isolationism: a Necessary Shift for Climate Justice

“…Solar geoengineering is also fraught with ecological and governance risks and investing in this approach is detracting from efforts for transformative social change [23]. There are multiple societal risks of advancing solar geoengineering [66]. In addition, to being a delay and distraction from the transformative changes that are desperately needed [48], the disruptions to the earth's hydrologic systems, including the inequitable impacts of altering the monsoon season in Southeast Asia, could cause new regional disparities and injustices in food and water access [1], new global health disparities [16], and further exacerbate biodiversity losses [72].…”

Environmental Peacebuilding and Solar Geoengineering

“…Viewing solar geoengineering as a threat could lead to avoiding research on it; the potential role in conflict has been cited as an argument against research. Even "unilateral, preemptive" research on geoengineering is seen to risk exacerbating international conflict by some analysts (Stephens et al, 2021a), with specific concern that U.S. research on solar geoengineering would increase securitization and the potential for militarization, citing this as one reason why the U.S. should not engage in research (Stephens et al, 2021b). Treating solar geoengineering it as a source of conflict could also make it more likely to lead to conflict, though conversely, it is also possible that treating solar geoengineering as a threat would avoid conflict.…”