New geoengineering studies sceptical of success

New geoengineering studies sceptical of success Shutterstock
29 Nov
2014
The UK’s first set of publicly-funded studies into climate intervention have dealt a blow to supporters of geoengineering projects, with results finding problems converting theories into successful possibilities

The Integrated Assessment of Geoengineering Proposals (IAGP) project, led by the University of Leeds, conducted an interdisciplinary study evaluating a range of expertises – climate modelling, philosophy and engineering – in addition to understanding public perceptions, to assess the effectiveness of geoengineering proposals.

The IAGP ran simulations of various geoengineering proposals, including forms of both solar geoengineering – such as reflective particles in the stratosphere, more reflective oceans, and more reflective crops –and carbon dioxide geoengineering – such as carbon dioxide capture and storage, ocean fertilisation, and afforestation – to observe how effectively each proposal achieved its desired goal.

Job-28127-Geoengineering-InfographicPotential forms of geoengineering investigated by the IAGP. Image courtesy of the University of Leeds

Piers Forster, Professor of Physical Climate Change at the University of Leeds, and principal investigator of the IAGP project, said ‘Geoengineering will be much more expensive and challenging than previous estimates suggest and any benefits would be limited. For example, when simulating the spraying of sea salt particles into clouds to try to brighten them, we found that only a few clouds were susceptible and that the particles would tend to coagulate and fall out before reaching the cloud base.’

The study brings into question whether there is enough time to research the necessary technologies required in order to make geoengineering a viable option for combating climate change.

‘I don’t think we can wait to research geoengineering,’ Professor Forster told Geographical. ‘Climate change is so important an issue that we need to examine all mitigation, adaptation and geoengineering options. The more technologies that are in the public domain, the more able we are to simulate their effects and possibly rule them out. For example, we found adding reflective material to the Sahara would be very damaging – so that would be essentially a no-go.

‘I doubt the perfect technology will ever exist as there will always be winners and losers with any intervention, including mitigation,’ he continued. ‘But in my mind, it is worth researching all of them, including combinations of technologies. If our simulations of them improve enough to become trustworthy, we may need to consider deploying them one day, but only within the context of other mitigation and adaptation options. Solar methods would only ever be a short-term partial solution and are perhaps better thought as an extreme adaptation technique.’

The IAGP project was started in 2010, off the back of a 2009 Royal Society report entitled Geoengineering the climate: science, governance and uncertainty. Two other projects received funding at the same time: the Stratospheric Particle Injection for Climate Engineering (SPICE) project, led by the University of Bristol, and the Climate Geoengineering Governance (CGG) project, led by the University of Oxford.

The SPICE project used volcanoes as models to mimic the effect of a solar geoengineering proposal, in which sulphate aerosols are pumped into the atmosphere to reflect more sunlight back into space. Dr Matthew Watson, a reader in natural hazards from the University of Bristol, and principal investigator for the SPICE project, said ‘Whilst it is clear that temperatures could be reduced during deployment, the potential for misstep is considerable. By identifying risks, we hope to contribute to the evidence base around geoengineering that will determine whether deployment, in the face of the threat of climate change, has the capacity to do more good than harm.’

Meanwhile, the CGG project concentrated on the governance and regulatory challenges posed by both research and possible deployment, and came to the conclusion that geoengineering proposals that are technically the easiest to implement and have the quickest impact may be the most difficult to govern, while those that are easiest to govern seem likely to be further away from effective large-scale deployment.

Share this story...

Submit to FacebookSubmit to Google PlusSubmit to Twitter

Related items

Leave a comment

ONLY registered members can leave comments and each comment is held pending authorisation before publishing. Please login or register to voice your opinion.

Geographical Week

Get the best of Geographical delivered straight to your inbox every Friday.

Subscribe Today

EDUCATION PARTNERS

Aberystwyth UniversityUniversity of GreenwichThe University of Winchester

TRAVEL PARTNERS

Ponant

Silversea

Travel the Unknown

DOSSIERS

Like longer reads? Try our in-depth dossiers that provide a comprehensive view of each topic

  • REDD+ or Dead?
    The UN-backed REDD+ (Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation) scheme, under which developing nations would be paid not to cut dow...
    The true cost of meat
    As one of the world’s biggest methane emitters, the meat industry has a lot more to concern itself with than merely dietary issues ...
    Long live the King
    It is barely half a century since the Born Free story caused the world to re-evaluate humanity’s relationship with lions. A few brief decades later,...
    London: a walk in the park
    In the 2016 London Mayoral election, the city’s natural environment was high on the agenda. Geographical asks: does the capital have a green future,...
    The Money Trail
    Remittance payments are a fundamental, yet often overlooked, part of the global economy. But the impact on nations receiving the money isn’t just a ...

MORE DOSSIERS

NEVER MISS A STORY - follow Geographical

Want to stay up to date with breaking Geographical stories? Join the thousands following us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram and stay informed about the world.

More articles in NATURE...

Oceans

Analysis into a killer whale found dead off the shores…

Geophoto

Less than 4,000 tigers remain in the wild, so it…

Oceans

Zafer Kizilkaya has been awarded the 2017 Whitley Gold Award…

Wildlife

John Kahekwa is the founder and general manager of the…

Polar

Recent observations of Arctic flora and fauna indicate major changes…

Oceans

A massive die-off of Australian mangrove forests is being attributed…

Energy

Geographical’s regular look at the world of climate change. This…

Climate

Was last year’s El Niño a practice run for future…

Wildlife

The continuing adventures of Aaron Gekoski as he joins the…

Geophoto

What do Ethiopia’s ‘church forests’, the incipient HS2 high-speed rail…

Wildlife

Aaron Gekoski continues working alongside the Wildlife Rescue Unit

Geophoto

Today, the camera is regarded as an essential smartphone feature.…

Oceans

An innovative new theory hopes to save millions of lives…

Wildlife

Aaron Gekoski continues his personal adventure into the wilds of…

Wildlife

Simple tracking devices have enabled conservationists to amass big data,…

Climate

In a new report, researchers have calculated the global emissions…

Climate

Geographical’s regular look at the world of climate change. This…

Wildlife

The latest episode sees ‘Bertie’ enlisting in wildlife rescue boot…

Energy

Icelandic engineers are attempting to harness the powerful geothermal energy…

Wildlife

New video series tracks the journey of Aaron Gekoski as…