Why solar geoengineering may not be the climate solution we need

As the climate crisis intensifies, some scientists are proposing a radical technological fix: solar geoengineering. This controversial approach, known as stratospheric aerosol injection (SAI), would involve deliberately releasing particles into the upper atmosphere to reflect sunlight away from Earth, essentially creating a planetary thermostat to counteract global warming caused by greenhouse gases.

However, climate expert Mike Hulme argues that this high-tech solution may be fundamentally flawed. While proponents claim that controlling global temperatures through geoengineering would reduce climate-related harm, Hulme challenges this core assumption. He contends that SAI fails to address most of the climate risks that actually matter to people’s daily lives and could potentially make some problems worse.

The debate highlights a critical question in climate policy: should we focus on technological interventions that attempt to manage global temperature, or are there more pressing climate impacts that such solutions would leave unaddressed? This challenge to geoengineering comes at a time when some researchers and policymakers are increasingly considering solar radiation management as a potential tool to buy time while the world transitions away from fossil fuels.

The concerns raised underscore the complexity of climate solutions and suggest that what appears to be a straightforward technological fix may not effectively tackle the multifaceted nature of climate risks facing communities worldwide.