The European Commission's scientific advisers are calling for an EU-wide moratorium 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 illuminating clouds.
Proponents argue that this can help in the fight against climate change, especially as planet-warming greenhouse gas emissions continue to rise. But small-scale experiments have sparked backlash over concerns that these technologies could do more harm than good.
The experiments have sparked backlash over concerns that these technologies could do more harm than good.
There is “insufficient scientific evidence” to show that solar geoengineering can actually prevent climate change, says the opinion written by the GCSA.
“Given the current very high levels of scientific and technical uncertainty… as well as possible harmful uses, we advocate a moratorium on all large-scale experimentation and deployment (solar geoengineering),” writes the EGE in the long-awaited second opinion.
According to the GCSA, solar geoengineering simply attempts to address “the symptoms rather than the root causes of climate change.” Greenhouse gas emissions, including carbon dioxide from fossil fuels, are warming the planet. Trying to artificially cool the Earth does not prevent that pollution from accumulating, nor does it address other serious consequences such as The oceans are becoming more acidic. since they absorb excess CO2. It could also cause unwanted problems, including changes in rainfall patterns or impact food production and solar energy generation, the GCSA notes.
The tactic that has drawn the most attention so far is to imitate the way Volcanic eruptions temporarily cool the planet. spewing sulfur dioxide into the stratosphere, producing a reflective haze. But the use of sulfur dioxide can also be considered a pollutant that could irritate people's lungs, cause acid rain and potentially open the ozone hole in Antarctica.
The experiments were likely too small to have a major impact on the climate. However, the company attempted to sell “refrigeration credits” at $10 per gram of sulfur dioxide to anyone interested in trying to offset their carbon emissions. The GCSA opinion says that the European Commission should “oppose” the use of cooling credits from solar geoengineering.
With the prospect of more rogue experiments, lawmakers are under pressure to draw up stricter international standards. The governing body of the United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity adopted restrictions on large-scale geoengineering in 2010but excludes small-scale experiments. Now, the European Commission's scientific advisers recommend a more explicit EU-wide moratorium. It also recommends laying the groundwork for a new international treaty on solar geoengineering and says the EU should advocate against the deployment of such technologies globally for the “foreseeable future.”
There have been some cautious efforts to fund legitimate solar geoengineering research, although they are likely limited to labs and computer models for now. Harvard recently canceled plans to conduct an open-air test flight in Sweden after facing opposition from indigenous Saami leaders who said they were not consulted about the experiment. The European Commission should evaluate new research on solar geoengineering every five to ten years, its scientific advisers say.
“These technologies are promising, but they are far from mature,” Ekaterina Zaharieva, commissioner for new businesses, research and innovation, said in a statement. statement today. “Research must continue, but the opinion of the European Ethics Group shows that research must be rigorous and ethical, and must take full account of the possible range of direct and indirect effects.”
