The idea of attempting radical geoengineering has proved controversial, with academics concerned about the risks involved in manipulating our planet’s atmosphere rather than focusing on emissions reduction.
But with growing fears the world could fail to limit global warming to 2C, the British Government is preparing to put taxpayer cash from the Advanced Research and Invention Agency (Aria) towards field trials that can test whether sci-fi climate engineering could become a reality.
Aria is an
innovation lab that was the brainchild of Dominic Cummings, the former No 10 adviser to Boris Johnson. Armed with £800m, it is tasked with pursuing scientific research to unlock “breakthroughs at the edge of the possible”.
The initiative is modelled on the US research agency Darpa, launched at the height of the Cold War, whose cutting-edge research contributed to the development of GPS, drones and the personal computer.
Aria has set out to tackle high-risk, high-reward scientific endeavours, from building humanoid robots to developing brain implants.
But it is the agency’s climate work that is raising eyebrows among academics. In a “programme thesis”, developed by Glasgow University’s Professor Mark Symes, Aria calls for proposals “exploring options for actively cooling the Earth”.
The thesis notes that engaging in such engineering would be a matter of “risk vs risk”, acknowledging there is debate as to whether society must “buy time” by “manipulating certain variables to reduce global temperatures on a short-to-medium term basis”.
Critics argue that developing geoengineering technologies as a solution to climate change is fraught with ethical problems. The risks include diverting resources from cutting carbon emissions, or creating false hope that a deus ex machina solution will emerge to save the planet.
Others worry that if a technology was developed, it would be impossible to garner international agreement on how to use it. Worse still, the cure could prove worse than the poison, resulting in unforeseen and catastrophic consequences for the biosphere.
Symes, however, insists “the work we are going to fund is not designed as a substitute for decarbonisation”. It is instead intended to provide fundamental research in case mankind trips over a “tipping point” that leads to sudden, uncontrollable global warming.
It will also research the “legal, ethical, governance and geopolitical dimensions” of
different approaches to geoengineering.
www.telegraph.co.uk
