Climatic Change

, Volume 33, Issue 3, pp 291–302 | Cite as

Geoengineering: Could— or should— we do it?

  • Stephen H. Schneider
Article

Abstract

Schemes to modify large-scale environment systems or to control climate have been seriously proposed for over 50 years, some to (1) increase temperatures in high latitudes, (2) increase precipitation, (3) decrease sea ice, (4) create irrigation opportunities or to offset potential global warming by spreading dust in the stratosphere to reflect away an equivalent amount of solar energy. These and other proposed geoengineering schemes are briefly reviewed from a historical perspective. More recently, many such schemes to advertently modify climate have been proposed as cheaper methods to counteract inadvertent climatic modifications than conventional mitigation techniques such as carbon taxes or pollutant emissions regulations. Whereas proponents argue cost effectiveness, critics of geoengineering argue that there is too much uncertainty to either (1) be confident that any geoengineering scheme would work as planned, or (2) that the many decades of international political stability and cooperation needed for the continuous maintenance of such schemes to offset century long inadvertent efforts is problematic. Moreover, there is potential for transboundary conflicts should negative climatic events occur during geoengineering activities since, given all the large uncertainties, it could not be assured to victims of such events that the schemes were entirely unrelated to their damages. Nevertheless, although I believe it would be irresponsible to implement any large-scale geoengineering scheme until scientific, legal and management uncertainties are substantially narrowed, I do agree that, given the potential for large inadvertent climatic changes now being built into the earth system, more systematic study of the potential for geoengineering is probably needed.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Broecker, W. S.: 1985, How to Build a Habitable Planet, Eldigio Press, Palisades, N.Y.Google Scholar
  2. Budyko, M. I.: 1977, Climate Changes, American Geophysical Union, Washington, DC. English translation of 1974 Russian volume, p. 244.Google Scholar
  3. Charlson, R. J., Langner, J., Rodhe, H., Leovy, C. B., and Warren, S. G.: 1991, ‘Perturbation of the Northern Hemisphere Radiative Balance by Backscattering from Anthropogenic Aerosols’, Tellus 43, 152–163.Google Scholar
  4. Choucri, N. (ed.): 1994, Global Accord: Environmental Challenges and International Responses, The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
  5. Daly, H. E. and Townsend, K. N. (eds.): 1993, Valuing the Earth: Economics, Ecology, Ethics, The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
  6. Dyson, F. J. and Marland, G.: 1979, Technical Fixes for the Climatic Effects of CO2, in Workshop on the Global Effects of Carbon Dioxide from Fossil Fuels, Rep. CONF-770385, U.S. Dept. of Energy, Washington D.C., pp. 111–118.Google Scholar
  7. Erickson, D. J., Oglesby, R. J., and Marshall, S.: 1995, ‘Climate Response to Indirect Anthropogenic Sulfate Forcing’, Geophys. Res. Lett. 22, 2017–2020.Google Scholar
  8. Gaskins, D. and Weyant, J.: 1993, ‘EMF-12: Model Comparisons of the Costs of Reducing CO2 Emissions’, Amer. Economic Rev. 83, 318–323.Google Scholar
  9. Glazovsky, N. F.: 1990, The Aral Crisis: The Origin and Possible Way Out, Naulca, Moscow.Google Scholar
  10. Grubb, M., Duong, M. H., and Chapuis, T.: 1994, ‘Optimizing Climate Change Abatement Responses: On Inertia and Induced Technology Development’, in Nakícenovic, N., Nordhaus, W. D., Richels, R., and Toth, F. L. (eds.), Integrative Assessment of Mitigation, Impacts and Adaptation to Climate Change, CP-94–9. International Institute of Applied Systems Analysis, Laxenberg, Austria, pp. 513–534.Google Scholar
  11. IPCC: 1996a, Climate Change 1995 - Economic and Social Dimensions: Contribution of Working Group III to the Second Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Bruce, J., Lee, H. and Haites, E., eds. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.Google Scholar
  12. IPCC: 1996b, Climate Change 1995 - The Science of Climate Change: Contribution of Working Group I to the Second Assessment of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Houghton, J. T., Meiro Filho, L. G., Callander, B. A., Harris, N., Kattenberg, A. and Maskell, K., eds. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.Google Scholar
  13. Johansson, T. B., Kelly, H., Reddy, A. K. N., and Williams, R. H. (eds.): 1993, Renewable Energy: Sources for Fuels and Electricity, Island Press, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  14. Keith, D. W. and Dowlatabadi, H.: 1992, ‘A Serious Look at Geoengineering’, EOS 73 (27), 289–296.Google Scholar
  15. Kellogg, W. W. and Schneider, S. H.: 1974, ‘Climate Stabilization: For Better or for Worse?’ Science 186, 1163–1172.Google Scholar
  16. Kiehl, J. and Briegleb, B. P.: 1993, ‘The Relative Roles of Sulfate Aerosols and Greenhouse Gases in Climate Forcing’, Science 260, 311.Google Scholar
  17. Langner, J. and Rodhe, H.: 1991, ‘A Global Three-Dimensional Model of the Tropospheric Sulfur Cycle’, J. Atmos. Chem. 13, 225.Google Scholar
  18. Lashof, A. and Tirpak, D. A. (eds.): 1990, Policy Options for Stabilizing Global Climate, Report to Congress: Executive Summary, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Policy, Planning and Evaluation, PM-221.Google Scholar
  19. Marchetti, C.: 1977, ‘On Geoengineering and the CO2 Problem’, Clim. Change 1 (1), 59–68.Google Scholar
  20. Mitchell, J. F. B., Johns, T. C., and Gregory, J. M.: 1995, ‘Climate Response to Increasing Levels of Greenhouse Gases and Sulphate Aerosols’, Nature 376, 501–504.Google Scholar
  21. Monastersky, R.: 1995, ‘Iron Versus the Greenhouse: Oceanographers Cautiously Explore a Global Warming Therapy’, Science News 148, 220–222.Google Scholar
  22. Nanda, V. P. and Moore, P. T.: 1983, ‘Global Management of the Environment: Regional and Multilateral Initiatives’, in Nanda, V. P. (ed.), World Climate Change: The Role of International Law and Institutions, Westview Press, Boulder, CO, pp. 93–123.Google Scholar
  23. National Academy of Sciences, 1992, Policy Implications of Greenhouse Warming: Mitigation, Adaptation, and the Science Base, Panel on Policy Implications of Greenhouse Warming, Committee on Science, Engineering, and Public Policy, National Academy Press, Washington, DC, pp. 433–464.Google Scholar
  24. Nordhaus, W. D.: 1992, ‘An Optimal Transition Path for Controlling Greenhouse Gases’, Science 258, 1315–1319.Google Scholar
  25. Root, T. L. and Schneider, S. H.: 1993, ‘Can Large-Scale Climatic Models be Linked with Multiscale Ecological Studies?’ Conserv. Biol. 7 (2), 256–270.Google Scholar
  26. Rusin, N. and Flit, L.: ca. 1960, ‘Man Versus Climate’, Translated from the Russian by Dorian Rottenberg. Peace Publishers, Moscow.Google Scholar
  27. Schelling, T. C.: 1983, ‘Climate Change: Implications for Welfare and Policy’, Chapter 9 in Changing Climate, National Research Council, pp. 442–482.Google Scholar
  28. Schneider, S. H.: 1994, ‘Detecting Climatic Change Signals: Are There Any “Fingerprints”?’ Science 263, 341–347.Google Scholar
  29. Schneider, S. H. and Mesirow, L. E.: 1976, The Genesis Strategy: Climate and Global Survival, Plenum, New York, 419 pp.Google Scholar
  30. Watson, A. J. et al.: 1994, ‘Minimal Effect of Iron Fertilization on Sea-Surface Carbon Dioxide Concentrations’, Nature 371, 143–145.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1996

Authors and Affiliations

  • Stephen H. Schneider
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Biological Sciences and Institute for International StudiesStanford UniversityStanfordU.S.A.

Personalised recommendations