The conversation surrounding geoengineering has grown in urgency as scientists continue to forecast that global temperatures are on track to exceed 2°C, with many efforts falling short of holding temperatures below the 1.5°C target. As we push closer to these dangerous thresholds, it becomes essential to ask: Is geoengineering an inevitable part of our response to climate change?
The State of Geoengineering Research
At present, climate engineering remains in a nascent stage. The different approaches being explored—whether it’s aerosol injection, marine cloud brightening, or surface cloud thinning—represent a broad array of possibilities. However, we are still far from having a comprehensive understanding of the costs, impacts, and practical implementation of these techniques.
We need to develop a much stronger knowledge base, and quickly, so that society can make informed decisions about whether to pursue these options. Even with field trials and preliminary research, many of these methods will still feel experimental until they are deployed on a larger scale. But given the rate at which temperatures are rising, I do believe that we are likely to reach a point where groups of nations or organisations feel compelled to test these interventions in earnest.
Already, we are seeing some early attempts to sell “cooling credits,” though these are unverified and largely speculative. The priority right now should be increasing our knowledge base so that society can make well-informed decisions about whether or not we should pursue geoengineering efforts.
Significant Developments in the UK
One of the most noteworthy developments in the field of geoengineering in the past year is the UK Government’s call for proposals on climate engineering through the Advanced Research and Invention Agency (ARIA). This is a significant milestone, as it demonstrates the government’s recognition of geoengineering as a vital area of research that has been underfunded. By supporting the development of a more comprehensive knowledge base, we can help society make better-informed decisions about these potential interventions.
Globally, while the US has historically been a leader in geoengineering research, other nations are stepping up. Europe, for example, has seen increased activity, with groups in Cambridge, TU Delft, and Manchester making significant contributions. Moreover, the Degrees Initiative is working to support scientists from the Global South, ensuring that this field of research becomes a truly global endeavor.
Interest in geoengineering is growing worldwide, with recent discussions taking place in locations as diverse as Chile, Boulder (Colorado), and even a planned conference next year in Cape Town. This broadening interest is a healthy development, as it signals that we are expanding our collective knowledge base rather than rushing into premature action.
The Ethical Dimension
While we push forward with research, it is vital to recognise that geoengineering carries substantial risks. If nations or groups become desperate due to prolonged droughts, failed crops, or other extreme climate impacts, they may attempt to implement these technologies out of sheer necessity. In such cases, it is critical that we have the knowledge to advise them on which methods might be safer and which should be avoided at all costs.
The hope is that geoengineering will never need to be deployed. But should the world reach that level of crisis, having a well-developed understanding of the risks and benefits of these technologies will be essential.
What Should Emerge from COP29?
As we look ahead to COP29, it is crucial that we acknowledge the reality of our current climate projections. Island nations like Palau face the loss of their homelands within the next century, and we are not on course to prevent that from happening. In addition to focusing on emissions reduction and greenhouse gas removal, we need to open a serious dialogue about climate engineering. This topic, while still somewhat taboo in the negotiation rooms, must be addressed if we are to keep global temperatures from spiraling out of control.
Last year’s COP saw the first real discussions of geoengineering in side events, but these conversations have yet to enter the official negotiation spaces. Acknowledging that our current strategies may not be enough would be a significant step forward. Moreover, discussing climate engineering at a global forum like COP would signal that we are ready to consider all potential solutions—however controversial—in the fight against climate change.