Current research suggests that SRM or CDR might reduce the impacts of climate change on ecosystems by reducing changes in temperature and precipitation.
The approaches have profound risks of negative impacts to the ozone layer, regional precipitation patterns, ecosystems, agriculture and the global climate.
Current research suggests that SRM or CDR might diminish the impacts of climate change on ecosystems by reducing changes in temperature and precipitation.
The Risks of Geoengineering Accelerating Biodiversity Loss and Compounding Planetary Crises CENTER for INTERNATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL LAW The Risks of Geoengineering Acronyms AU artificial upwelling BECCS bioenergy carbon capture and storage CBD Convention on Biological Diversity CDR carbon dioxide removal DAC direct air capture EW enhanced weathering HGM hollow glass microspheres IEEFA Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change MCB marine cloud brightening mCDR marine carbon dioxide OAE ocean alkalinity enhancement PAR photosynthetically active radiation PFAS per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances SAI stratospheric aerosol injection SRM solar radiation modification Center for International Environmental Law 1 Key Takeaways Geoengineering not only fails to address the root causes of the climate crisis but risks accelerating ecosystem collapse and species extinction. Julia Farkas et al., “Characterization of Hollow Glass Microspheres with Potential for Regional Climate Intervention to Preserve Snow and Ice Surfaces,” Cold Regions Science and Technology 215 (2023): 103967, https:/ /doi.org/10.1016/j.coldregions.2023.103967. 5840 (2007): 902–902, https:/ /doi.org/10.1126/science.1141361; Timothy Searchinger et al., “Fixing a Critical Climate Accounting Error,” Science 326, no.
Geoengineering schemes like BECCS that are meant to manipulate our ecosystems and global natural processes come with great risks and
Three proactive strategies could reduce the risks of climate change: 1) mitigation: reducing emissions; 2) adaptation: moderating climate impacts by increasing our capacity to cope with them; and 3) geoengineering: deliberately manipulating physical, chemical, or biological aspects of the Earth system2. This policy statement focuses on large-scale efforts to geoengineer the climate system to counteract the consequences of increasing greenhouse gas emissions. The possibility of quick and seemingly inexpensive geoengineering fixes could distract the public and policy makers from critically needed efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and build society’s capacity to deal with unavoidable climate impacts. Geoengineering will not substitute for either aggressive mitigation or proactive adaptation, but it could contribute to a comprehensive risk management strategy to slow climate change and alleviate some of its negative impacts.
Geoengineering could be crucial in the fight against climate change. But first scientists need to learn how to talk to the public about it.
# Reviewing the potential impacts of geoengineering on ecosystems and biodiversity. Although such technology brings potential benefits, a CCI Horizon Scanning exercise in 2008 highlighted geoengineering as a potential future issue for conservation as the technologies being developed tend to be novel and so little is known about either their effectiveness or their impact on ecosystems and biodiversity. In 2012, Shared Challenges funded a review of the potential impacts of geoengineering technology on biodiversity and ecosystems and to identify gaps in our knowledge that need further research. It will also help people to access the latest information on twenty of the geoengineering techniques currently being discussed and their potential positive or negative impacts on biodiversity. b) Where priority knowledge gaps exist about the biodiversity and ecosystem effects of these changes. This will help form a basis for a future research agenda, encouraging timely investigation of the potential biodiversity and ecosystem effects of geo-engineering.