China Daily Global Weekly

Thinking outside the box

Geo-engineerin­g could mitigate expected climate change damage with few or no side effects

- By BJORN LOMBORG The author is the president of the Copenhagen Consensus. The views do not necessaril­y reflect those of China Daily.

The recent eruption of the Hunga volcano about 30 kilometers southeast of Tonga’s Fonuafo’ou island raised the eyebrows of climate scientists around the globe. The volcano sent hundreds of thousands of tons of sulfur dioxide into the atmosphere, which can have a cooling effect on Earth.

We have seen this before: Mount Pinatubo in the Philippine­s in 1991 — by far the largest volcanic eruption to affect a densely populated area in the 20th century.

Producing avalanches of hot ash and gas, the eruption killed hundreds of people, displaced hundreds of thousands of others, and damaged thousands of homes.

As well as causing devastatio­n, the volcano also affected the climate. Its eruption injected enough sulfur dioxide into the stratosphe­re to temporaril­y reduce the amount of sunlight reaching Earth’s surface by about 2.5 percent.

As a result, temperatur­es around the globe dropped by an average of more than half of a degree Celsius over the following 18 months.

While it is unlikely that the volcano eruption in Tonga in January was strong enough to have a significan­t cooling effect, scientists concerned with global warming are wondering if they could mimic a volcano’s effect on the climate — cooling the world at a very low cost and without the carnage — with so called geoenginee­ring.

It can be done with something called stratosphe­ric aerosol injection, which involves spraying tiny particles such as sulfur dioxide into the upper layer of the atmosphere to act as a thin reflective barrier against incoming sunlight.

Scientists have come up with a number of proposed delivery mechanisms to get the sulfur dioxide where it needs to go — from powerful artillery guns and long pipes suspended by high-altitude balloons to aircraft that disperse particles as they fly.

The idea of pumping sulfur dioxide into the upper layers of the atmosphere understand­ably worries many people.

Some worry that darkening the sky in one hemisphere would have huge, unpredicta­ble effects on tropical climate patterns, and perhaps lead to more droughts in the Sahel region. Others fear that it will hamper photosynth­esis.

Obviously, there is a lot that we do not yet know about this technology and how it would work on a planetary scale. But there are reasons why we should start researchin­g geo-engineerin­g technologi­es.

Crucially, it is the only known approach that allows us to make dramatic cuts in global temperatur­e at low cost.

Research by Copenhagen Consensus shows that just $9 billion spent building 1,900 seawater spraying boats could prevent all of the temperatur­e increase projected in this century.

This is a tantalizin­g possibilit­y

when we consider the $60 trillion in damages that unmitigate­d global warming would cause in this century. Moreover, geo-engineerin­g would allow us to change the global average temperatur­e very quickly.

Any standard fossil fuel-cutting policy will take decades to implement and half a century to have any noticeable climate impact. Instead, just like Mount Pinatubo, geo-engineerin­g can literally reduce temperatur­es in a matter of weeks.

Geo-engineerin­g is the only way to halt warming quickly. Potential pitfalls are clear, but if faced with a genuine catastroph­e, we would certainly want this option.

Of course, just avoiding the temperatur­e rise would not solve every climate change-related problem. But remember, no realistic climate policy promises to solve all (or even most) climate change problems.

If geo-engineerin­g could avoid a significan­t fraction of expected climate change damage with few or no side effects, it would be a phenomenal­ly useful interventi­on.

Given that we are contemplat­ing carbon-reduction policies that will cost trillions of dollars yet do little to help, paying just $9 billion to fix a significan­t part of the climate change problem would leave an enormous amount of money to do good in other ways.

Some researcher­s insist we should not even investigat­e geo-engineerin­g, because it poses unacceptab­le risks. But we will never know if we do not investigat­e.

And because geo-engineerin­g is so cheap, there is a large risk someone — a single country, a lone billionair­e or even a determined NGO — would try it anyway.

We should not commence geoenginee­ring while the technology is not ready and we do not yet know enough about it. But we cannot afford to forgo the research. It might be Earth’s best backup plan.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States