This analysis evaluates the environmental disruptions and ethical implications of climate engineering, suggesting a need for governance frameworks.
Climate engineering, also known as geoengineering, refers to the deliberate large-scale intervention in Earth’s climate system with the aim of mitigating the adverse effects of climate change. As global temperatures rise and conventional mitigation strategies lag behind, interest in these technologies is growing. Climate engineering is broadly classified into two categories: Carbon Dioxide Removal (CDR) and Solar Radiation Management (SRM), each with distinct methodologies, objectives, and risk profiles. While proponents argue that these approaches may offer a critical backup plan in case of climate emergency, critics warn against their uncertain long-term impacts and ethical implications. This paper explores both the environmental and ethical dimensions of climate engineering. It analyzes key techniques under CDR and SRM, potential environmental disruptions, governance gaps, and moral challenges, including issues of consent, intergenerational justice, and equity. Real-world case studies such as the SPICE project in the UK, ocean fertilization by the Haida Nation in Canada, and Iceland’s CarbFix initiative are examined to highlight the practical, legal, and societal dilemmas posed by geoengineering. Through an interdisciplinary lens, this study argues that any advancement in climate engineering must be guided by transparent, inclusive governance frameworks that prioritize precaution, sustainability, and justice.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Simran Mehta (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: