EU Scientists Call for Moratorium on Solar Geoengineering Experiments

European Commission Calls for Moratorium on Solar Geoengineering Efforts

Scientific advisers to the European Commission are advocating for a moratorium across the EU on the use of solar geoengineering technologies. These methods, which aim to artificially cool the Earth by reflecting sunlight back into space, include the injection of reflective particles into the atmosphere and the brightening of clouds. While proponents argue that these technologies could aid in combating climate change, they have faced significant backlash due to concerns about their potential negative consequences.

Examining the Science Behind Solar Geoengineering

The European Commission recently requested insights from its Group of Chief Scientific Advisors (GCSA) and the European Group on Ethics in Science and New Technologies (EGE) regarding solar geoengineering. Their findings, published today in a comprehensive report, highlight the limited understanding of how these technologies could function and their potential to effectively address climate change.

The GCSA's opinion indicates that there is "insufficient scientific evidence" to support the efficacy of solar geoengineering in preventing climate change. They recommend a moratorium on large-scale experiments and deployments, citing "very high levels of scientific and technical uncertainty" related to these technologies.

The Risks of Solar Geoengineering

According to the GCSA, solar geoengineering merely addresses the symptoms of climate change, rather than its root causes. The ongoing increase in greenhouse gas emissions, particularly carbon dioxide from fossil fuels, continues to heat the planet. Implementing solar geoengineering does not reduce this pollution or mitigate the serious issues associated with it, such as rising ocean acidity and the potential for altering rainfall patterns.

One frequently discussed method involves mimicking the cooling effects of volcanic eruptions by releasing sulfur dioxide into the stratosphere to create a reflective haze. However, the GCSA warns that using sulfur dioxide poses several environmental risks, including contributing to acid rain and potentially exacerbating issues like the Antarctic ozone hole.

Global Implications and Regulatory Proposals

A controversial startup gained attention for their 2022 experiment involving sulfur dioxide released from weather balloons in Mexico. The backlash was swift, leading Mexico to ban solar geoengineering experiments. Despite this, the US-based company persisted in their efforts, offering "cooling credits" at $10 per gram of sulfur dioxide, attempting to attract buyers interested in offsetting their carbon footprint.

The GCSA's opinion emphasizes the need for the European Commission to fully "oppose" the use of cooling credits derived from solar geoengineering. With increasing concerns regarding rogue experiments, EU lawmakers are under pressure to establish stronger international regulations. Although restrictions on large-scale geoengineering were adopted by the UN Convention on Biological Diversity back in 2010, these regulations exempt smaller trials, highlighting a regulatory gap.

Future of Solar Geoengineering Research

In light of these findings, the European Commission's scientific advisers not only call for an EU-wide moratorium but also suggest laying the groundwork for a new international treaty on solar geoengineering. The GCSA proposes that research efforts should be focused primarily on legitimate and ethical studies confined to lab environments and computer models.

Specifically, they recommend assessing new research every five to ten years. Despite the recent backlash, there have been attempts to fund legitimate research into solar geoengineering, albeit with caution. For instance, Harvard canceled plans for an outdoor test flight in Sweden after facing opposition from Indigenous Saami leaders who felt excluded from the decision-making process.

Conclusion

While solar geoengineering technologies exhibit potential, they remain unproven and immature. Commissioner Ekaterina Zaharieva emphasized the necessity for thorough and ethical research that takes into account the direct and indirect effects of these technologies. The path forward requires careful evaluation, robust regulation, and ongoing international dialogue to effectively confront the climate crisis.