Space-based geoengineering involves the use of space-based devices to reflect or block sunlight, thereby reducing the amount of solar energy reaching the Earth.
For example, geoengineering includes the removal of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere (also called Carbon Dioxide Removal – CDR) through methods such as direct air capture and storage, ocean iron fertilization, or ocean alkalinity enhancement. These activities are referred to as **Solar Geoengineering** or **Solar Radiation Modification (SRM).** Most proposed solar radiation modification techniques involve adding material to the atmosphere to increase the amount of incoming sunlight reflected back to space. Marine solar radiation management (mSRM) techniques, on the other hand, involve adding materials to ocean waters, sea ice, or the lower atmosphere to increase the amount of solar radiation reflected at or near the ocean's surface to limit surface warming or sea ice melt. * *Marine Cloud Brightening (MCB)* – adding particles, such as sea spray, to the lower atmosphere (near the surface) to increase the reflectivity of clouds over the ocean. Another subset of geoengineering activities intends to cool the Earth by intentionally modifying the concentration of certain gases in the atmosphere, including carbon dioxide.
Solar Radiation Management: Implications for Asia www.etcgroup.org November 2018 4 Computer Model Scenario Results for Stratospheric Aerosol Injection experiments Models indicate that under all the proposed SRM experiments analysed by a geoengineering comparison project (GeoMIP) (see Box 3), the mean temperature of the planet could be reduced to pre-industrial levels, or to the mean temperature between 2010 and 2029 (RCP4.5; experiments G3 and G4). A 2015 study looking at six different SRM schemes – crop albedo modification, desert albedo modification, ocean albedo modification, sea-spray geoengineering, cirrus cloud thinning, and stratospheric sulphur dioxide injections – showed that potentially damaging changes in regional precipitation were a common feature (Crook et al., 2015).5 An earlier study found that albedo enhancement over land6 decreased global precipitation by 13 percent, decreased runoff over land by 22 percent, and resulted in reduced soil water (Bala and Nag, 2012).
Solar radiation modification (SRM), also called solar geoengineering, is a group of large-scale approaches to reduce global warming by increasing the amount
Our Simulators En-ROADS C-ROADS FEBAC. Explore the En-ROADS Simulator. Our Experiences Climate Solutions Workshop Climate Action Simulation Game World Climate Simulation Game Custom Experience. Frequently Asked Questions Top Resources & Materials Contact Us. Solution home En-ROADS How do I simulate...? En-ROADS does not include possible geoengineering methods such as solar radiation management at this time. One way to approximate a test of a geoengineering approach in En-ROADS would be to lower the climate sensitivity assumption in the model. En-ROADS does include carbon dioxide removal (CDR) methods (removing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, for example through bioenergy with carbon capture and storage, or direct air capture), and these are included in the “Technological Carbon Removal” slider and its advanced settings. To learn more about CDR in En-ROADS, read this FAQ: How do I simulate Carbon Dioxide Removal (CDR)? Capturing that impact and the necessary equity/diplomatic considerations that would need to be wrestled with if SRM is deployed is not something that En-ROADS is designed for. Did you find it helpful?
This approach involves reflecting sunlight back into space while allowing Earth's infrared radiation to escape, thereby controlling climate change.
The Harvard Solar Geoengineering Research Program (SGRP) aims to reduce uncertainties surrounding solar geoengineering; generate critical science, technology, and policy insights; and help inform the public debate surrounding this controversial idea. Recognizing that solar geoengineering could not be a replacement for reducing emissions or adapting to climate impacts, SGRP draws on Harvard’s research capabilities and global convening power to provide the knowledge necessary in considering solar geoengineering as a supplement to broader mitigation and adaptation efforts. The Harvard Solar Geoengineering Research Program (SGRP) aims to reduce uncertainties surrounding solar geoengineering; generate critical science, technology, and policy insights; and help inform the public debate surrounding this controversial idea. Recognizing that solar geoengineering could not be a replacement for reducing emissions or adapting to climate impacts, SGRP draws on Harvard’s research capabilities and global convening power to provide the knowledge necessary in considering solar geoengineering as a supplement to broader mitigation and adaptation efforts. * In 1980, Professor Tom Schelling chaired a National Academy of Sciences committee whose report, *Changing Climate*, addressed the potential for solar geoengineering to counter global warming.
However, research shows that using solar geoengineering could indirectly lower the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere by stemming permafrost melt, reducing energy-sector emissions and causing changes to the carbon-cycle feedback. Aerosol injection could have an edge on other proposed forms of solar geoengineering because it would not require a large technological leap to become a reality, Jones says:. These brighter clouds would reflect away more sunlight, says Prof Douglas MacMartin, an engineering researcher from Cornell University, who contributed to the US House of Representatives’ hearing on geoengineering. Earlier this month, MacMartin, Keith and Prof Katharine Ricke, a climate scientist from the University of California, San Diego, published a research paper exploring how solar geoengineering – via releasing aerosols into the stratosphere – could be used as part of an “overall strategy” for limiting global warming to 1.5C, which is the aspirational target of the Paris Agreement. However, the researchers point out that using solar geoengineering to hold global warming to 1.5C would not have the same environmental effect as reaching the target using mitigation.