Feasibility of cooling the Earth with a cloud of small spacecraft near the inner Lagrange point (L1)

Solar radiation management with a tethered sun shield

This paper presents an approach to Solar Radiation Management (SRM) using a tethered solar shield at the modified gravitational L1 Lagrange point. Unlike previous proposals, which were constrained by the McInnes bound on shield surface density, our proposed configuration with a counterweight toward the Sun circumvents this limitation and potentially reduces the total mass by orders of magnitude. Furthermore, only 1% of the total weight must come from Earth, with ballast from lunar dust or asteroids serving as the remainder. This approach could lead to a significant cost reduction and potentially be more effective than previous space-based SRM strategies.

Ecocentrism and Biosphere Life Extension

The biosphere represents the global sum of all ecosystems. According to a prominent view in environmental ethics, ecocentrism, these ecosystems matter for their own sake, and not only because they contribute to human ends. As such, some ecocentrists are critical of the modern industrial civilization, and a few even argue that an irreversible collapse of the modern industrial civilization would be a good thing. However, taking a longer view and considering the eventual destruction of the biosphere by astronomical processes, we argue that humans, a species with considerable technological know-how and industrial capacity could intervene to extend the lifespan of Earth's biosphere, perhaps by several billion years. We argue that human civilization, despite its flaws and harmful impacts on many ecosystems, is the biosphere's best hope of avoiding premature destruction. We argue that proponents of ecocentrism, even those who wholly disregard anthropocentric values, have a strong moral reason preserve the modern industrial civilization, for as long as needed to ensure biosphere survival.

Evaluating climate geoengineering proposals in the context of the Paris Agreement temperature goals

Current mitigation efforts and existing future commitments are inadequate to accomplish the Paris Agreement temperature goals. In light of this, research and debate are intensifying on the possibilities of additionally employing proposed climate geoengineering technologies, either through atmospheric carbon dioxide removal or farther-reaching interventions altering the Earth’s radiative energy budget. Although research indicates that several techniques may eventually have the physical potential to contribute to limiting climate change, all are in early stages of development, involve substantial uncertainties and risks, and raise ethical and governance dilemmas. Based on present knowledge, climate geoengineering techniques cannot be relied on to significantly contribute to meeting the Paris Agreement temperature goals.

Research and debate are intensifying on complementing CO₂ emissions reductions with hypothetical climate geoengineering techniques. Here, the authors assess their potentials, uncertainties and risks, and show that they cannot yet be relied on to significantly contribute to meeting the Paris Agreement temperature goals.

Solar geoengineering as part of an overall strategy for meeting the 1.5°C Paris target

Solar geoengineering refers to deliberately reducing net radiative forcing by reflecting some sunlight back to space, in order to reduce anthropogenic climate changes; a possible such approach would be adding aerosols to the stratosphere. If future mitigation proves insufficient to limit the rise in global mean temperature to less than 1.5°C above preindustrial, it is plausible that some additional and limited deployment of solar geoengineering could reduce climate damages. That is, these approaches could eventually be considered as part of an overall strategy to manage the risks of climate change, combining emissions reduction, net-negative emissions technologies and solar geoengineering to meet climate goals. We first provide a physical-science review of current research, research trends and some of the key gaps in knowledge that would need to be addressed to support informed decisions. Next, since few climate model simulations have considered these limited-deployment scenarios, we synthesize prior results to assess the projected response if solar geoengineering were used to limit global mean temperature to 1.5°C above preindustrial in an overshoot scenario that would otherwise peak near 3°C. While there are some important differences, the resulting climate is closer in many respects to a climate where the 1.5°C target is achieved through mitigation alone than either is to the 3°C climate with no geoengineering. This holds for both regional temperature and precipitation changes; indeed, there are no regions where a majority of models project that this moderate level of geoengineering would produce a statistically significant shift in precipitation further away from preindustrial levels.This article is part of the theme issue 'The Paris Agreement: understanding the physical and social challenges for a warming world of 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels'.

Optimal Sunshade Configurations for Space-Based Geoengineering near the Sun-Earth L1 Point

Within the context of anthropogenic climate change, but also considering the Earth’s natural climate variability, this paper explores the speculative possibility of large-scale active control of the Earth’s radiative forcing. In particular, the paper revisits the concept of deploying a large sunshade or occulting disk at a static position near the Sun-Earth L₁ Lagrange equilibrium point. Among the solar radiation management methods that have been proposed thus far, space-based concepts are generally seen as the least timely, albeit also as one of the most efficient. Large occulting structures could potentially offset all of the global mean temperature increase due to greenhouse gas emissions. This paper investigates optimal configurations of orbiting occulting disks that not only offset a global temperature increase, but also mitigate regional differences such as latitudinal and seasonal difference of monthly mean temperature. A globally resolved energy balance model is used to provide insights into the coupling between the motion of the occulting disks and the Earth’s climate. This allows us to revise previous studies, but also, for the first time, to search for families of orbits that improve the efficiency of occulting disks at offsetting climate change on both global and regional scales. Although natural orbits exist near the L₁ equilibrium point, their period does not match that required for geoengineering purposes, thus forced orbits were designed that require small changes to the disk attitude in order to control its motion. Finally, configurations of two occulting disks are presented which provide the same shading area as previously published studies, but achieve reductions of residual latitudinal and seasonal temperature changes.

Structured film for compensation of anthropogenic radiative forcing

A possible solution for the global warming problem consists of scattering the solar radiation by a cloud of screens, placed near the inner Lagrange point (L1), between the sun and the earth. The thin film material for such a screen should have a high longevity in space environment, low areal density, high on-axis scattering, very low integral reflectivity over the whole solar spectrum, and good handling properties such as foldability and robustness. We report on experimental fabrication of free-standing robust nitride films satisfying to most optical and mechanical requirements for such a screen.

Technology as a geological phenomenon: implications for human well-being

The technosphere, the interlinked set of communication, transportation, bureaucratic and other systems that act to metabolize fossil fuels and other energy resources, is considered to be an emerging global paradigm, with similarities to the lithosphere, atmosphere, hydrosphere and biosphere. The technosphere is of global extent, exhibits large-scale appropriation of mass and energy resources, shows a tendency to co-opt for its own use information produced by the environment, and is autonomous. Unlike the older paradigms, the technosphere has not yet evolved the ability to recycle its own waste stream. Unless or until it does so, its status as a paradigm remains provisional. Humans are ‘parts’ of the technosphere – subcomponents essential for system function. Viewed from the inside by its human parts, the technosphere is perceived as a derived and controlled construct. Viewed from outside as a geological phenomenon, the technosphere appears as a quasi-autonomous system whose dynamics constrains the behaviour of its human parts. A geological perspective on technology suggests why strategies to limit environmental damage that consider only the needs of people are likely to fail without parallel consideration of the requirements of technology, especially its need for an abundant supply of energy.

An ecological compass for planetary engineering

Proposals to address present-day global warming through the large-scale application of technology to the climate system, known as geoengineering, raise questions of environmental ethics relevant to the broader issue of planetary engineering. These questions have also arisen in the scientific literature as discussions of how to terraform a planet such as Mars or Venus in order to make it more Earth-like and habitable. Here we draw on insights from terraforming and environmental ethics to develop a two-axis comparative tool for ethical frameworks that considers the intrinsic or instrumental value placed upon organisms, environments, planetary systems, or space. We apply this analysis to the realm of planetary engineering, such as terraforming on Mars or geoengineering on present-day Earth, as well as to questions of planetary protection and space exploration.

The runaway greenhouse: implications for future climate change, geoengineering and planetary atmospheres

The ultimate climate emergency is a 'runaway greenhouse': a hot and water-vapour-rich atmosphere limits the emission of thermal radiation to space, causing runaway warming. Warming ceases only after the surface reaches approximately 1400 K and emits radiation in the near-infrared, where water is not a good greenhouse gas. This would evaporate the entire ocean and exterminate all planetary life. Venus experienced a runaway greenhouse in the past, and we expect that the Earth will in around 2 billion years as solar luminosity increases. But could we bring on such a catastrophe prematurely, by our current climate-altering activities? Here, we review what is known about the runaway greenhouse to answer this question, describing the various limits on outgoing radiation and how climate will evolve between these. The good news is that almost all lines of evidence lead us to believe that is unlikely to be possible, even in principle, to trigger full a runaway greenhouse by addition of non-condensible greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide to the atmosphere. However, our understanding of the dynamics, thermodynamics, radiative transfer and cloud physics of hot and steamy atmospheres is weak. We cannot therefore completely rule out the possibility that human actions might cause a transition, if not to full runaway, then at least to a much warmer climate state than the present one. High climate sensitivity might provide a warning. If we, or more likely our remote descendants, are threatened with a runaway greenhouse, then geoengineering to reflect sunlight might be life's only hope. Injecting reflective aerosols into the stratosphere would be too short-lived, and even sunshades in space might require excessive maintenance. In the distant future, modifying Earth's orbit might provide a sustainable solution. The runaway greenhouse also remains relevant in planetary sciences and astrobiology: as extrasolar planets smaller and nearer to their stars are detected, some will be in a runaway greenhouse state.

Photophoretic levitation of engineered aerosols for geoengineering

Aerosols could be injected into the upper atmosphere to engineer the climate by scattering incident sunlight so as to produce a cooling tendency that may mitigate the risks posed by the accumulation of greenhouse gases. Analysis of climate engineering has focused on sulfate aerosols. Here I examine the possibility that engineered nanoparticles could exploit photophoretic forces, enabling more control over particle distribution and lifetime than is possible with sulfates, perhaps allowing climate engineering to be accomplished with fewer side effects. The use of electrostatic or magnetic materials enables a class of photophoretic forces not found in nature. Photophoretic levitation could loft particles above the stratosphere, reducing their capacity to interfere with ozone chemistry; and, by increasing particle lifetimes, it would reduce the need for continual replenishment of the aerosol. Moreover, particles might be engineered to drift poleward enabling albedo modification to be tailored to counter polar warming while minimizing the impact on equatorial climates.

Efficacy of geoengineering to limit 21st century sea-level rise

Geoengineering has been proposed as a feasible way of mitigating anthropogenic climate change, especially increasing global temperatures in the 21st century. The two main geoengineering options are limiting incoming solar radiation, or modifying the carbon cycle. Here we examine the impact of five geoengineering approaches on sea level; SO(2) aerosol injection into the stratosphere, mirrors in space, afforestation, biochar, and bioenergy with carbon sequestration. Sea level responds mainly at centennial time scales to temperature change, and has been largely driven by anthropogenic forcing since 1850. Making use a model of sea-level rise as a function of time-varying climate forcing factors (solar radiation, volcanism, and greenhouse gas emissions) we find that sea-level rise by 2100 will likely be 30 cm higher than 2000 levels despite all but the most aggressive geoengineering under all except the most stringent greenhouse gas emissions scenarios. The least risky and most desirable way of limiting sea-level rise is bioenergy with carbon sequestration. However aerosol injection or a space mirror system reducing insolation at an accelerating rate of 1 W m(-2) per decade from now to 2100 could limit or reduce sea levels. Aerosol injection delivering a constant 4 W m(-2) reduction in radiative forcing (similar to a 1991 Pinatubo eruption every 18 months) could delay sea-level rise by 40-80 years. Aerosol injection appears to fail cost-benefit analysis unless it can be maintained continuously, and damage caused by the climate response to the aerosols is less than about 0.6% Global World Product.

Biological approaches to global environment change mitigation and remediation

One of the most pressing and globally recognized challenges is how to mitigate the effects of global environment change brought about by increasing emissions of greenhouse gases, especially CO(2). In this review we evaluate the potential contribution of four biological approaches to mitigating global environment change: reducing atmospheric CO(2) concentrations through soil carbon sequestration and afforestation; reducing predicted increases in global surface temperatures through increasing the albedo of crop plants; and fertilizing the oceans to increase primary productivity and CO(2) drawdown. We conclude that none of these biological approaches are 'magic bullets' capable of reversing environmental changes brought about by increasing emissions of greenhouse gases. However, it is possible that increasing crop albedo and soil carbon sequestration might contribute towards mitigation on a regional scale. In the absence of legally binding international agreements to reduce CO(2) emissions, we propose that: increased efforts are made to identify novel biological mitigatory strategies; further research is conducted to minimise the uncertainties present in all four of the biological approaches described; and pilot-level field work is conducted to examine the feasibility of the most promising strategies. Finally, it is essential to engage with the public concerning strategies for mitigating the effects of climate change because the majority of the biological approaches have effects, quite possibly of a negative nature, on ecosystem services and land usage.

'Geoengineering'--taking control of our planet's climate

There is international consensus that 'dangerous' climate change must be avoided. Yet without radical changes in energy sources and usage and global economies, changes that so far society has been unable or unwilling to make, it seems highly likely that we will start to experience unacceptably damaging and/or societally disruptive global environmental change later this century. What actions can be taken to safeguard future environmental quality, ecosystems, agriculture, economy, and society? A new science--'geoengineering'--that until recently would have seemed pure science fiction, promises an alternative way of temporarily regaining control of climate. Colossal engineering schemes to shade the sun, make the atmosphere hazier, modify clouds, even throw iron into the ocean, are all being promoted as possible ways out of our dilemma. This article considers the state of this new science, and its implications for society.

Geoengineering: could we or should we make it work?

Schemes to modify large-scale environment systems or control climate have been proposed for over 50 years to (i) increase temperatures in high latitudes, (ii) increase precipitation, (iii) decrease sea ice, (iv) create irrigation opportunities, or (v) offset potential global warming by injecting iron in the oceans or sea-salt aerosol in the marine boundary layer or spreading dust in the stratosphere to reflect away an amount of solar energy equivalent to the amount of heat trapped by increased greenhouse gases from human activities. These and other proposed geoengineering schemes are briefly reviewed. Recent schemes to intentionally modify climate have been proposed as either cheaper methods to counteract inadvertent climatic modifications than conventional mitigation techniques such as carbon taxes or pollutant emissions regulations or as a counter to rising emissions as governments delay policy action. Whereas proponents argue cost-effectiveness or the need to be prepared if mitigation and adaptation policies are not strong enough or enacted quickly enough to avoid the worst widespread impacts, critics point to the uncertainty that (i) any geoengineering scheme would work as planned or (ii) that the many centuries of international political stability and cooperation needed for the continuous maintenance of such schemes to offset century-long inadvertent effects is socially feasible. Moreover, the potential exists for transboundary conflicts should negative climatic events occur during geoengineering activities.

Impact of geoengineering schemes on the global hydrological cycle

The rapidly rising CO(2) level in the atmosphere has led to proposals of climate stabilization by "geoengineering" schemes that would mitigate climate change by intentionally reducing solar radiation incident on Earth's surface. In this article we address the impact of these climate stabilization schemes on the global hydrological cycle. By using equilibrium climate simulations, we show that insolation reductions sufficient to offset global-scale temperature increases lead to a decrease in global mean precipitation. This occurs because solar forcing is more effective in driving changes in global mean evaporation than is CO(2) forcing of a similar magnitude. In the model used here, the hydrological sensitivity, defined as the percentage change in global mean precipitation per degree warming, is 2.4% K(-1) for solar forcing, but only 1.5% K(-1) for CO(2) forcing. Although other models and the climate system itself may differ quantitatively from this result, the conclusion can be understood based on simple considerations of the surface energy budget and thus is likely to be robust. For the same surface temperature change, insolation changes result in relatively larger changes in net radiative fluxes at the surface; these are compensated by larger changes in the sum of latent and sensible heat fluxes. Hence, the hydrological cycle is more sensitive to temperature adjustment by changes in insolation than by changes in greenhouse gases. This implies that an alteration in solar forcing might offset temperature changes or hydrological changes from greenhouse warming, but could not cancel both at once.