Plans to artificially dim the sun have divided scientists—here's what they're actually arguing about
No, President Joe Biden did not engineer Hurricane Milton. No, the ice crystal contrails left behind by high-altitude aircraft are not "chemtrails" sprayed by governments to control the weather or manipulate populations. No, state-run cloud seeding did not cause the record floods in Dubai.
Solar geoengineering, a contentious scientific debate, aims to cool the climate by manipulating sunlight entering or leaving Earth's system. Outdoor experiments, particularly involving stratospheric aerosol injection, have sparked intense disagreement among scientists. The process entails releasing sulfur dioxide into the stratosphere, where it forms reflective particles that mimic the cooling effect of major volcanic eruptions.
Recent research exploring the potential of such experiments revealed that small trials could help elucidate aerosol formation and particle behavior in different atmospheric conditions. As the scale of experiments increases, so does the regulatory scrutiny. However, critics argue that these experiments could inadvertently pave the way for larger trials, potentially leading to deployment.
They contend that research should focus on answering specific questions to enhance computer models, rather than risking progress toward full-scale deployment. Environmental activists caution that the technology may sustain existing economic systems, undermining the need for structural change. Despite these concerns, researchers maintain that SRM research could offer valuable insights while governments and institutions work towards reducing greenhouse gas emissions and developing carbon removal strategies.
Written by urgent.news from Phys.org's reporting — not their text. Machine-written — may contain errors; check the original before relying on it.
