# The American Geophysical Union Unveils Ethical Guidelines for Geoengineering Research
During the summer months in the Northern Hemisphere, average global temperatures lingered approximately 1.5°C above pre-industrial benchmarks, leading to severe weather incidents that hinted at what might become a new reality by mid-century. Regrettably, forecasts indicate that this warming trend will persist, with existing emissions pathways suggesting the possibility of a temperature increase doubling by the century’s end. In light of the forecasted disastrous climate repercussions, discussions are emerging that geoengineering—deliberate measures taken to modify the climate system—might be essential to alleviate the most severe ramifications of climate change.
Nonetheless, geoengineering is laden with uncertainties, including potential risks and unforeseen effects. To mitigate these issues, the American Geophysical Union (AGU) has introduced a set of ethical frameworks to ensure that geoengineering research is performed in a responsible and transparent manner.
## Understanding Geoengineering
Geoengineering pertains to intentional actions directed at modifying the Earth’s climate system to combat the impacts of global warming. It is generally categorized into two main types:
1. **Solar Radiation Management (SRM):** This strategy aims to reduce the volume of solar energy that reaches the planet’s surface. Methods may include increasing cloud reflectivity or dispersing reflective aerosols into the stratosphere to bounce sunlight back into space. Although SRM could potentially decrease global temperatures, it carries notable uncertainties regarding its potential effects on weather systems, agriculture, ecosystems, and human health. The National Academies of Science has acknowledged that our grasp of the possible implications of SRM is still inadequate, highlighting the necessity for continued investigation.
2. **Carbon Dioxide Removal (CDR):** This technique seeks to extract carbon dioxide (CO₂) from the atmosphere, aiming to reverse some of the harm inflicted by fossil fuel usage. CDR methodologies consist of reforestation, direct air capture, and oceanic strategies like improving the ocean’s capacity to absorb CO₂. While CDR may appear to be a simple remedy, it is also associated with risks, including unintended ecological impacts and the difficulties in securely storing the absorbed carbon.
### The Immediate Need for Research
The urgency surrounding geoengineering research is escalating, particularly as certain private enterprises and individuals are proactively investigating these technologies. For example, in 2022, a startup controversially disclosed its intentions to provide solar radiation management as a service for carbon emissions offset. This underscores the importance of comprehending the potential ramifications of geoengineering prior to widespread adoption and the necessity for ethical standards to oversee such investigations.
## The AGU’s Ethical Guidelines
Acknowledging the risks and intricacies related to geoengineering, the AGU has established a framework to assist researchers, policymakers, and the general public in the responsible conduct and evaluation of geoengineering studies. This framework is anchored in five fundamental principles:
### 1. **Responsible Research**
The AGU asserts that geoengineering inquiries should never replace efforts to reduce carbon emissions. Instead, the focus should be on analyzing the risks and advantages of geoengineering methods, enabling informed decision-making by policymakers and the public. Prior to commencing any research, the public must be clearly informed about how such research will enhance our understanding of the respective benefits and drawbacks of geoengineering.
### 2. **Comprehensive Climate Justice**
Geoengineering holds the potential to impact not only today’s populations but also those in the future. Certain techniques, like stratospheric aerosol injection, may lead to scenarios in which upcoming generations experience abrupt and substantial warming if the geoengineering projects are halted. Moreover, the effects of geoengineering may be unevenly distributed, offering benefits to some regions while disadvantaging others. The AGU’s directives emphasize the necessity of prioritizing historically marginalized communities and the natural environment when evaluating the potential impacts of geoengineering.
### 3. **Inclusive Public Engagement**
Geoengineering research should not take place in isolation from the communities it may influence. The AGU advocates for inclusive public engagement, ensuring that those affected are part of the research process and that their informed consent is attained. Researchers should consistently interact with these communities and adjust their methods to respect local cultural values.
### 4. **Openness**
Openness is essential for fostering public confidence in geoengineering research. The AGU’s principles demand complete transparency regarding research funding sources and ensure that these funders do not interfere with the study’s design or outcomes. Additionally, all decisions made in the research process and their justifications should be made publicly accessible.
### 5. **Informed Governance**
Geoengineering research must align with local, national, and international regulations. The AGU suggests that all research initiatives obtain approval from an independent entity before any action is initiated. Furthermore, all participants in the research—including funders, institutions, and contractors—should be accountable to governments, public bodies, and the communities anticipated to be impacted by their activities.
## The Challenges Ahead
While the AGU’s ethical guidelines offer a framework for conducting geoengineering research responsibly, they also underscore the complexities involved in this field. Research efforts…
