[ad_1]
The enormous societal pressure to stop solar geoengineering research does not mean that all such research will end – it means that researchers who care about openness and transparency may stop their activities, while those who continue may be concerned about public concerns less sensitive. They will be supported by funders who don’t care about public opinion – perhaps private actors or the military – and we may not hear all the findings. Authoritarian regimes will be able to take the lead; if we do not succeed in phasing out fossil fuels, we may have to rely on their expertise in the future. Without funding from international agencies and charities, scientists in developing countries – already disadvantaged in participating in this research – may be even less able to do so.
Solar geoengineering research requires public funding from national science agencies. This can help ensure several important things. It maintains public scrutiny of research and enables the design of research programmes that integrate social scientists and governance scholars from the outset, resulting in the key types of interdisciplinary research needed on the topic. In addition, public funding can be designed to encourage international scientific collaboration.For example, a paper published at AGU studies Solar Geoengineering of Crop Yield Including researchers from Norway, the United States, South Korea and China. We want to continue this collaboration, not kill it.
Perhaps most importantly, national funding agencies can structure research programs that examine potential risks and benefits in a comprehensive manner, ensuring adequate attention is paid to everything that can go wrong. Without this systematic approach, only a small subset of studies could be published, showing only the best results, making solar geoengineering look better than it really is. Is that study on crop yield good? What does it miss? To find out, we need more research, not less, and we need bodies like the IPCC to assess them together.
No scientist is happy about the prospect of solar geoengineering. But we will need a thoughtful, experienced person who understands both science and governance issues. If we don’t encourage people to develop this expertise, we may not like the results.
Good science takes years to develop. If we postpone our research to the 2030s, we may find ourselves in a world that has made some lopsided but not enough cuts in greenhouse gas emissions, with temperatures still heading towards a 3°C increase. We cannot suddenly hope to produce rigorous science to help us understand whether solar geoengineering is desirable.First, the United States should follow the well-thought-out recommendations developed by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, namely Been trying to solve this problem recently, and immediately fund a modest, careful research program.
Holly Jean Buck is Assistant Professor of Environment and Sustainability at the University at Buffalo and author of Ending Fossil Fuels: Why Net Zero Isn’t Enough.
[ad_2]
Source link
