As global heating heads to 1.8C, is it time to consider the ‘Voldemort’ of climate policy?
The case for large-scale technologies that reflect solar radiation back into space rests on global warming’s grim reality.
The world is projected to exceed the 1.5°C global warming target, prompting discussions on climate policy at upcoming UN climate talks. Initially viewed as defeatist, climate adaptation is now a crucial component of climate policy. Similarly, the taboo surrounding carbon removal interventions is evolving. However, another controversial climate intervention – solar radiation modification (SRM) – is gaining acceptance.
SRM involves large-scale technological methods to reflect sunlight back into space, thereby lowering global temperatures. The most discussed method is stratospheric aerosol injection (SAI), which mimics the cooling effects of volcanic eruptions. Despite its potential to reduce temperatures, SRM does not limit carbon emissions and has uncertain ecological effects.
Critics express concerns about a "techno-fix" deterring mitigation efforts and the risks of abrupt temperature rise if SRM is discontinued. SRM currently exists in a policy vacuum, with some scholars advocating for a ban on research due to perceived divine intervention in nature. However, the case for SRM research is based on global warming's severe consequences, such as polar ice retreat, Amazon rainforest death, and coral reef loss.
While SRM research is not yet regulated, Australia's government funds support related research. Australia lacks a specific SRM policy but should assess the potential impacts of SRM options to prepare for the challenges posed by a fast-moving, undergoverned field.
Written by urgent.news from The Conversation AU's reporting — not their text. Machine-written — may contain errors; check the original before relying on it.
