What’s at stake for the Global South in the debate around solar geoengineering research
Recently, I sat in a room in Cape Town with African climate scientists, watching them present results from sophisticated models examining how solar geoengineering interventions might affect local weather patterns across the continent. These researchers, primarily climate impact modelers who have expanded their work to include solar geoengineering scenarios, were doing exactly what critics claim the Global South lacks capacity for: producing rigorous, locally relevant climate science.
Solar geoengineering is a suite of controversial climate interventions designed to reduce global warming by reflecting sunlight away from Earth. Proposed approaches range from injecting reflective particles into the stratosphere to brightening marine clouds. Whereas some see solar geoengineering as a potential tool to reduce climate risks given slow progress on achieving climate action milestones, others view it as a dangerous distraction that could undermine emissions reduction efforts while creating new environmental and geopolitical risks.
Solar geoengineering has recently entered mainstream climate discussions, with both the US and European Union exploring formal positions on its research and governance, and the UK launching a research program focused on risk analysis. Leading scientific organizations like the US National Academies of Sciences advocate for cautious and coordinated research, and more than 500 scientists and experts have signed an open letter calling for an international non-use agreement to prevent deployment. These debates over potential deployment have sparked intense disagreements about whether the technology should even be studied.
The debate over solar geoengineering research is particularly charged when it comes to the Global South.
This piece was originally published in Science on November 28, 2024. Read the full article here.
