The case in summary Solar Radiation Modification (SRM) is a method of cooling the globe by manipulating solar rays, but the method is controversial and experimental. There is a growing opinion that the use of SRM should be considered in the fight against climate change. Scientists fear major unforeseen consequences, such as affecting rainfall patterns and the ozone layer. And there are concerns about uncoordinated large-scale use of the technology. Several countries and commercial players have shown interest in SRM, and experts fear it could affect relations between states. There are no international rules or frameworks that directly address the use of SRM, which can lead to uncontrolled use. There is a need for much more knowledge about the effects of SRM, as well as transparency around the research and who finances it, experts believe. The summary is made by an AI service from OpenAi. The content is quality assured by news’s journalists before publication. How do you cool a globe? Can you spray particles high up in the atmosphere, which reflect sunlight back into space? Or perhaps we can enhance the clouds’ ability to protect us from the sun’s rays? It might sound a bit sci-fi. And the methods are experimental and controversial. But it is being worked on for real. What is called Solar Radiation Modifafion – or SRM – was long dismissed by most. But now something is happening. The idea of modifying solar rays is becoming more and more commonplace. Volcanic eruptions have had a cooling effect, by spewing particles high into the atmosphere. It is after this function that one type of SRM tries to emulate. Photo: Salvatore Allegra / AP – It is a fairly widespread opinion that it is relatively likely that it will be put into use within the next few decades, says Trude Storelvmo, professor of meteorology at the University of Oslo. Because the earth is getting hotter and hotter. The weather is becoming increasingly extreme. And humanity shows little will or ability to cut the emissions that cause it. So more and more people think we must seriously consider whether we can tackle the sun. These days, the issue is actually raised at a high international political level. More on that soon. But first: why has it become relevant? And what could go wrong? Many people wonder if SRM is not a way for people to play God. Illustration: Alexander Slotten / news – Very big concerns – You have to watch out for measures that could potentially worsen the situation. Jan Fuglestvedt is among the world’s foremost climate scientists. He is one of the tops in the UN climate panel itself. In this matter, he speaks as a researcher at Cicero. Fuglestved was central to the work on the UN climate panel’s latest main report, i.e. the modest pile he stands with here. Photo: Alexander Slotten / news Fuglestvedt is a sane man, who rarely speaks in capital letters. But here he is clear: – There is great cause for concern about uncoordinated large-scale use of this as a measure against warming. Fuglestvedt emphasizes that he has not directly researched SRM, or radiation modification measures, in good Norwegian. But he has taken a great interest in the subject. Together with more and more of his serious research colleagues. – I hear more and more people say that now that we are so keen to drive, we have to consider it seriously. We need to look at this properly. The idea is that SRM can buy humanity precious time to avoid the worst devastation of the climate crisis. If we manage to block the sun’s rays that heat from the sky, while we cut the emissions that heat from the earth. He points to the two arrows in the report: one shows risks from heating without SRM. The other shows less risk from heating, but risk from SRM. Photo: Alexander Slotten / news But tampering with the weather can have consequences we cannot even imagine today. The main message from the world’s leading climate scientists is that we lack enormous knowledge about the effects. What if it affects rainfall patterns so that there is more drought in one place and more flooding in another? If we spray particles high into the atmosphere, what will happen to the important ozone layer? And if we manage to reduce solar radiation, but the technology suddenly says stop, it will be a shock to the system, says Fuglestvedt. – This is what we call the termination effect. If you rely on SRM, and it suddenly breaks down or you stop it, then you get a very fast heating. Presumably much faster than the warming you would otherwise have received. Fuglestvedt shows what will happen to the temperatures if SRM technology suddenly stops working. Photo: Alexander Slotten / news He believes that SRM is in any case not something we can resort to today. And he is crystal clear that if the world ever goes for SRM, it must come in addition to, not instead of, emission cuts. – It is safer to try to back out of a situation, i.e. to reduce emissions, than to go in and manipulate something so fundamental to the state of the earth. So the stakes are high, says Fuglestvedt. It is not only researchers who are interested. Commercial interests Trude Storelvmo has recently returned home from Italy. The climate researcher from UiO has attended a conference about SRM. It is primarily a place where researchers can exchange the latest results. Here the discussion has moved on from the purely theoretical. – Now there was actually much more focus on whether this could be done and how. So one step closer to envisioning an actual implementation, she says. There are several types of SRM, and this here is a less controversial variant, explains Storelvmo. This man painted his roof white to bring down the temperature inside, during the intense heat wave in India last summer. White reflects more sun. Photo: Ajit Solanki / AP It is now being discussed whether to allow small-scale testing of the most invasive types of solar radiation modification. Storelvmo highlights a country that has come a long way. – In Europe, people have been more cautious and perhaps had a little fear of touch, perhaps rightly so. While in the USA quite a lot of resources are poured into research on SRM. For example, Microsoft founder Bill Gates has put money into Harvard’s work in the area. Commercial interests were probably also present at the SRM conference, says Storelvmo. Big money is pumped into research into weather modification, explains Trude Storelvmo. Photo: Annika Byrde / NTB Most researchers are quite reserved and primarily want to do thorough research, she explains. It is not certain that everyone shares that priority. – You can imagine that commercial environments will be more eager to use it. So that is what one is worried about, that this is being driven forward by commercial interests. But SRM is not only applicable to rich superpowers and their multi-billionaires. Poor countries in the global south have also taken an interest, says Storelvmo. Storelvmo and research colleagues met in Italy to discuss the latest news about SRM. Photo: Gordon Research Conference – They suffer disproportionately from the consequences of climate change. And they see that the emissions are not decreasing. Then they showed an interest in this way of cooling the climate. – It’s understandable, but also thought-provoking, says Storelvmo. The fact that several countries open the islands to SRM can also bring with it a completely different type of challenges. – Would have been ragnarok – This is a completely far-fetched case, but we use Norway as an example, begins Professor Halvard Buhaug at Prio, Institute for Peace Research. He makes many reservations that it is difficult to predict the future on a topic like this, and the uncertainty is great. But he points out that it can affect relations between states. The great uncertainty surrounding the consequences of SRM means that we have to be extra careful, believes Buhaugh. Photo: Alexander Slotten / news In his thought experiment, Norway has succeeded with SRM to reduce extremism. While this has ruined Sweden’s agriculture. – Then we will be in a situation where we have saved costs or made money, while the neighbor has had increased costs or lost income. Inequality and the experience of injustice are some of the things that lie at the bottom of many conflicts, he explains. The idea of ”counter modification” has also been floated in SRM discussions. That is, a country initiates its own counter-modification in response to another country’s modification. – And it will be ragnarok, says Buhaug. The fenris wolf breathes fire out of its mouth and eyes when Ragnarok breaks loose. Illustration: Alexander Slotten / news There are no international rules or frameworks that directly deal with the use of SRM. In theory, the USA, or China, or Norway, or a private actor could just get started. After all, Buhaug believes that it is unlikely that it will lead to armed conflicts between states. But he believes there can be many other serious negative consequences. – The uncertainty is very great, and that in itself is a reason why we do not want to get there. We want to have a political and legal framework that can control the development and use of this technology, he says. These days, an attempt was made to initiate just that. Could modification and counter-modification become part of our future? Illustration: Alexander Slotten / news – Can’t stick your head in the sand Switzerland put forward a proposal for the world’s climate ministers who met this week in Nairobi, at the UN Environment Assembly (UNEP). They asked the UN to set up an expert group to look at risks and opportunities related to SRM. This is controversial in itself. Critics believe it helps to legitimize SRM. That this draws attention and funds and support away from safe climate measures that already exist and that we know work – namely to cut emissions of greenhouse gases. But the proposal fell through. The countries were unable to agree on key points. It was this gang in Nairobi who failed to agree on SRM. Photo: SIMON MAINA / AFP Climate Minister Andreas Bjelland Eriksen was in Nairobi. Norway is open to new technology, but SRM is currently not such a solution, he says. The most important thing now is to implement climate solutions that do not involve significant unknown risks. – Norway supports the development of a common knowledge base, not least through the UN and UNEP. Norway was therefore willing to support the part of the resolution proposal that could contribute to a knowledge-based discussion where the purpose was stricter control, he says to news. – The alternative, which could be a more uncontrolled development outside established multilateral processes, is not desirable. All the experts news has spoken to agree that much more knowledge is the first priority. Storelvmo is also calling for transparency around the research, and whoever is funding it. The Minister for Climate Change does not want an uncontrolled development in SRM. Photo: Milana Knezevic / Jo Randen She understands that some are concerned about whether this research should be carried out at all. – But I think that what you see now is that the cat is in a way out of the bag. This is now being considered by enough people and on a large enough scale that I think you can no longer bury your head in the sand and pretend it doesn’t exist. – It is too late to simply say that this and that should not be considered, because that train has already, in a way, started to move.
ttn-69
– The stakes are high – news Norway – Overview of news from different parts of the country
