SG - Why a Non-Use Agreement?
In 2022, more than 380 academics from 53 countries have signed an Open Letter calling for an “International Non-Use Agreement on Solar Geoengineering”. What is going on here?
Scientists argue against the increasing ‘normalization’ of solar geoengineering as a speculative part of the climate policy portfolio. They contend that solar geoengineering at planetary scale is too risky, that it results in dangerous delays and detractions in mitigation policies, and that SRM deployment would not be governable in a globally inclusive and just manner. Frank Biermann, one of the initiators and coordinators of this Open Letter, discusses the reasons behind this initiative.
About lecture series ‘Solar Radiation Management’
On January the 17th, 2022 a group of scientists published a plea for an ‘international non-use agreement’ of Solar Radiation Modification (SRM). What is going on here? Is flattening the earth-heating curve by SRM a no-go area? Does SRM cross political and ethical lines? Or is it a bad investment and should we use our resources and energy in more promising and effective alternatives? And why are scientists themselves asking for a ban? Aren’t we obliged to search for every possible technological solution, because there is reasonable doubt that we do enough to stop the warming of the earth climate?
About Frank Biermann
My work provides analytical groundwork for policy reform and charts detailed directions for new research. I propose ‘earth system’ governance as an empirical reality and a political necessity.