'Dimming the sun': $100m geoengineering research programme proposed

[Judi Lynn]

All options to fight climate crisis must be explored, says national academy, but critics fear side-effects

Damian Carrington Environment editor
@dpcarrington
Thu 25 Mar 2021 11.00 EDT

The US should establish a multimillion-dollar research programme on solar geoengineering, according to the country’s national science academy.

In a report it recommends funding of $100m (£73m) to $200m over five years to better understand the feasibility of interventions to dim the sun, the risk of harmful unintended consequences and how such technology could be governed in an ethical way.

The National Academies of Sciences (NAS) said cutting fossil fuel emissions remained the most urgent and important action to tackle the climate crisis. But it said the worryingly slow progress on climate action meant all options needed to be understood.

Outdoor experiments should be allowed only if they provide critical knowledge that cannot be obtained by other means, said the report, and the research programme “should not be designed to advance future deployment of these interventions”. Harvard University is hoping to gain imminent approval from an independent committee for test flights, which are opposed by environmental groups.

More:
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/mar/25/top-us-scientists-back-100m-geoengineering-research-proposal

[Hugh_Lebowski]

1. Unfortunately we do need to consider all options at this point (nt)

[cstanleytech]

2. Money would be better spent on finding alternative ways to do things like how to build batteries and

things like solar panels in a manner that does not cause more harm to the environment.

[NNadir]

4. Attempting to make batteries and solar cells clean by throwing...

...even more money at them, when trillion dollar quantities already spent has had no result at slowing climate change, is a wasteful fool's errand.

The nearly three trillion already spent on solar and wind energy has done nothing other than accelerate climate change.

It's not money so much that's needed, it's clear thinking. Chanting tired mantras of the solar/wind/battery religion is not even close to being clear thinking.

[cstanleytech]

5. I'm not arguing. My point was simply that there are better ways to spend the proposed amount.

[NNadir]

6. OK, I hear you, but I stand by remarks on the example you gave.

A better expenditure if we were to go for geoengineering, would be direct air capture, the kind of work being done for just one example that comes to mind, by Chris Jones's group a Georgia Tech.

DAC requires clean energy, and basically, whether we like it or not, there is one and only one form of clean energy.

[-misanthroptimist]

3. Dimming the Sun is just a fundamentally wrong-headed idea.