Engineering news
Geo-engineering techniques could well be needed in the fight against climate change, but urgent research into their efficacy and the development of a suitable regulatory framework for their deployment is essential, an influential committee of MPs has heard.
The House of Commons Science and Technology Committee listened to evidence from leading scientists. John Virgoe, an expert in geo-engineering governance, told the MPs it was “premature” to say that such techniques – man-made technologies with the potential to cool down the planet or suck up greenhouse gases – would definitely be needed. But he said there was a pressing need to explore their technical, ethical and regulatory aspects. “There is increasing reason to believe we might be heading that way in the future,” said Virgoe.
The Commons committee is working on an inquiry into the regulation of geo-engineering in tandem with its counterpart in the US Congress. Geo-engineering is thought of as an ideal subject for international collaboration because it could involve actions that cross national boundaries. These might include increasing the albedo of clouds to reflect more sunlight or fertilising oceans with iron to create carbon sinks. Unilateral geo-engineering actions by countries could have an impact on other nations, so it is thought that international agreements would be needed to regulate their use. Some techniques that only have an impact locally – such as the creation of artificial “trees” to sequester CO2 – could take place within existing regulatory frameworks, the MPs heard.
Dr Jason Blackstock, of the Canadian Centre for International Governance Innovation, said: “We lack the international regulatory framework for solar radiation management. Different geo-engineering techniques require different regulatory mechanisms.” Virgoe added that it was likely there would be a need for a “portfolio” of regulatory structures.
There are concerns that geo-engineering could be used for military purposes.
Leading climate scientist Dr David Keith, director of the ISEEE Energy and Environmental Systems Group, said unilateral actions by large nations could be risky and that “there are limits to what can be done in international law”. Norms and treaties for the use of geo-engineering techniques needed to be developed, he added. The MPs heard that more research into geo-engineering was required before international negotiations on its regulation could take place.
Blackstock said: “There is a range of risks with geo-engineering and we need quite a sophisticated framework for assessing those. Those risks will have to be balanced against the threat of climate change.” It is possible that countries on the margins of the climate change debate may be opposed to geo-engineering in principle, the MPs heard.
There is concern that geo-engineering could be seen as a “get-out clause” that could divert attention from efforts to mitigate CO2 emissions. There is growing opinion to this effect in the US, for example. Sir David King, former government chief scientific adviser, told MPs: “Quite clearly, the major effort has to be around de-fossilising the economy.”