Opponents of geoengineering misunderstand humanity’s choices

Moreover, we now know that crucial emissions of methane and other non-CO₂ gasses have far exceeded the IPCC’s target levels for them in the years since the 2017 baseline. And we have every reason to believe these emissions will continue to exceed the IPCC suppositions long past 2030.

Bloomberg Green, like the IPCC, sugar-coats its commentary:

In principle, the goal is simple: Roll this number [carbon emissions] downward by phasing-out emissions until reaching zero. In practice, however, this number continues to rise. Global CO₂ emissions from fossil fuels stopped growing from 2014-2016, . . . Increases resumed since then, despite a temporary drop-off during 2020 pandemic quarantines. These emissions need to fall to half their 2010 level by 2030 to keep alive the Paris Agreement goal of limiting warming to below 1.5°C.

There’s some help on the way. Dozens of countries, including nine of the 10 largest economies have pledged to zero-out emissions by mid-century. . . . No collective task has ever been more difficult.

Geoengineering needed to stop climate change destruction 

The hard reality is that without some kind of prompt geoengineering action, climate change will accelerate the damage we are already seeing: disappearing glaciers and polar icecaps, droughts, extreme flooding, hurricanes, massive forest fires, and destruction of coral reefs and fisheries, food insecurity, and species extinction.

Together these events will cause more mass migrations, ethnic genocides, and frequent civil and international wars, which in turn could cause irreversible damage to human civilization and most life on the planet. U.S. government agencies, including reports by the U.S. Global Change Research Program and testimony by the former Director of National Intelligence, already foresee multiple, serious threats that shape their view of the future.

Geoengineering research might demonstrate that proposed geoengineering projects cannot achieve their aims without unacceptable risks and damage. But only more scientific and engineering research can answer those questions. Humanity must pursue every possible means of minimizing the foreseeable climate disruption of the coming half-century. The alternative is passivity in the face of an incredible amount of human and animal suffering during the coming decades.

Pursuing geoengineering research might also weaken some world leaders’ sense of urgency about decarbonization, but that is a questionable hypothesis. Climate-related damage will increase visibly during the coming decades, and the public clamor for action will inevitably increase along with it.

Even if the IPCC’s timeline for ending fossil fuel emissions is achievable, by 2100 the disintegration of what we think of as modern civilization could be so great that it won’t matter exactly when we succeed in ending fossil fuel use. Much of what we hope to preserve will have been swept away by then.