Solar geoengineering has been suggested as a temporary measure to buy time for the emissions cuts needed to stabilise global temperatures.
These arguments have generally considered geoengineering as an independent component of the “toolbox” of options for climate change mitigation.
However, this perspective overlooks the knock-on effects that pursuing solar geoengineering could have on reaching net-zero.
The idea of solar geoengineering is to reduce global temperatures by reflecting more of the sun’s incoming radiation away from the Earth’s surface. One of the most talked-about approaches is stratospheric aerosol injection (SAI), which involves the injection of aerosols in an upper layer of the atmosphere.
In a pair of studies, published in Earth System Dynamics and Earth’s Future, we explore the potential impact that deploying SAI could have on the potential to generate wind and solar energy.
Our findings show that SAI could slow decarbonisation efforts by reducing the output of these energy systems. In this way, solar geoengineering could create an additional challenge to reaching net-zero, thus creating further obstacles for avoiding dangerous warming.
Buying time with temporary geoengineering
One of the criticisms of solar geoengineering is that its pursuit could obstruct or discourage ongoing and future efforts to cut emissions, sometimes referred to as mitigation deterrence. While the evidence of this is limited, what about the technological implications that could constrain efforts to reduce emissions?
To tackle this question, we have undertaken two studies into how SAI could affect the potential for solar and wind energy – key renewable sources in the transition to net-zero.
Our experiments focus on a scenario where SAI is used to bring global temperatures down from a very high-warming pathway (SSP5-8.5) that represents a failure of climate policy – to a moderate-warming pathway broadly in line with current policies (SSP2-4.5).
We compare the scenarios in the last decade of the simulations, the 2090s, where the signal of human-caused climate change is strongest.
The chart below illustrates the absolute warming levels for these pathways – showing climate model simulations for the moderate (grey lines), high (black) and SAI (red). The red bar shows the decade of interest at the end of the 21st century.
Under these pathways, end of century warming would be 2.2C lower in the SAI scenario than under high warming.
We focus on three different dimensions that help determine renewable energy potential and calculate these for each grid cell and each timestep of our simulations:
- A politico-economic dimension that assesses suitability based on land cover, regulatory restrictions and distance to population.
- The physical entity that represents the unconstrained energy resource, such as radiation, wind speed and temperature.
- The technical aspects related to conversion losses from turning energy from the sun or wind into electricity. This depends on characteristics related to solar panels or wind turbines and the density of their placement in a wind or solar farm.
These dimensions, and their interactions, are illustrated in the figure below, divided between politico-economic (green), technical (blue) and physical (purple).
Extended periods of low solar
Our results indicate that the potential for solar energy, whether compared to a moderate emissions scenario or the high emissions baseline, would be reduced in almost all parts of the world if SAI is used.
The maps below show the increase (green shading) and decrease (purple) in solar energy potential in the SAI scenario relative to the moderate (left) and high (right) warming scenarios.
We find typically larger differences under moderate warming than high warming because solar energy potential is larger in a world where global temperatures are not raised as high. Solar panel efficiency is reduced substantially in a much-warmer world.
Geographically, the largest relative reductions are in the mid-to-high latitudes. (This is due to solar geometry, which dictates that the sun’s rays arrive at a lower angle for higher latitudes, meaning they have to pass through more aerosol particles on their way to the surface.)
However, perhaps even more importantly, using SAI enhances the frequency of extended periods with low solar potential.
As the principle of SAI is to reduce incoming solar radiation, a fall in solar energy potential is to be expected.
Yet, there are actually two impacts of SAI that favour solar power: a thinning of tropical clouds, which compensates for some of the direct reduction of incoming sunlight, and lower ambient temperatures compared to the high-warming scenario, which benefit the efficiency of solar panels.
However, neither of these two impacts outweighs the overall reduction in solar power potential.
SAI may also affect how solar panels are positioned. Typically, panels are tilted to maximise the amount of direct radiation reaching the panels surface. However, under SAI, we find that radiation reaching the panels is less direct and increasingly diffuse. Therefore, tilting solar panels may become less useful.
Regional reductions in wind potential
Our findings suggest that changes in on- and offshore wind potential under SAI can be of a similar magnitude to those for solar, but whether the impact causes an increase or decrease in energy potential is highly variable depending on the location and season.
Overall, these changes lead to a negligible global impact on wind potential, but the regional charges can still be significant – with particular reductions in China and central Asia, along with Mexico, western US and many parts of the southern hemisphere.
This is shown in the maps below, which illustrate the increase (green) and decrease (purple) in offshore wind energy potential in the SAI scenario relative to the moderate (left) and high (right) warming scenarios.
The changes in wind potential under SAI are caused by changes in large-scale atmospheric circulation – mainly a result of the heat absorbed by the injected aerosols.
The impact on wind potential is more nuanced than for solar. For example, there is a general long-term slowing of surface winds under SAI. (This has also been observed in simulations using a different climate model from the one used in our study.)
However, due to the delicate range of wind speeds where wind turbines operate, slower winds can actually lead to either an increase or a decrease in potential.
Of course, changes in wind energy potential are only realised if the areas are actually exploited for wind energy. However, the large regional changes in wind potential may imply that a different strategy would be needed for siting windfarms in order to maximise the energy produced. However, this would cause problems later down the line if SAI is intended as a temporary measure.
Implications for decarbonisation
With a reduced potential for wind and solar when using SAI, there is a risk that deploying SAI would actually lead to a slowing of decarbonisation.
This, in turn, implies that solar geoengineering would need to be deployed for even longer – unless the gap could be met with higher amounts of carbon dioxide removal. Other research has found that, once started, geoengineering would be required for multiple centuries.
Such knock-on impacts put the concept of using geoengineering to “buy time” for climate change mitigation into question.
In fact, because of the reduced output of renewables under SAI, relatively more renewable capacity would need to be installed just to produce the same amount of energy as without SAI.
At the same time, renewable technology may also need to be adapted to SAI circulation and radiation conditions for optimal energy production. This could include adjusting the tilt of solar panels and adapting windfarm placement strategy and wind turbine characteristics.
The substantial impact geoengineering could have on mitigation – and vice versa – highlights the importance of considering such couplings when moving towards more comprehensive assessments of climate geoengineering.
The post Guest post: How solar geoengineering could disrupt wind and solar power appeared first on Carbon Brief.
Guest post: How solar geoengineering could disrupt wind and solar power
I fell flat on my backside one afternoon this January and, weirdly, it made me think of you. Okay, I know that takes a bit of unpacking—so let me go back and start at the beginning.
For the last six years, our family has joined with half a dozen others to spend a week or so up at Wangat Lodge, located on a 50-acre subtropical rainforest property around three hours north of Sydney. The accommodation is pretty basic, with no wifi coverage—so time in Wangat really revolves around the bush. You live by the rhythm of the sun and the rain, with the days punctuated by swimming in the river and walking through the forest.
An intrinsic part of Wangat is Dan, the owner and custodian of the place, and the guide on our walks. He talks about time, place, and care with great enthusiasm, but always tenderly and never with sanctimony. “There is no such thing as ‘the same walk’”, is one of Dan’s refrains, because the way he sees it “every day, there is change in the world around you” of plants, animals, water and weather. Dan speaks of Wangat with such evident love, but not covetousness; it is a lightness which includes gentle consciousness that his own obligations arise only because of the historic dispossession of others. He inspires because of how he is.
One of the highlights this year was a river walk with Dan, during which we paddled or waded through most of the route, with only occasional scrambles up the bank. Sometimes the only sensible option is to swim. Among the life around us, we notice large numbers of tadpoles in the water, which is clean enough to drink. Our own tadpoles, the kids in the group, delight in the expedition. I overhear one of the youngest children declaring that she’s having ‘one of the best days ever’. Dan looks content. Part of his mission is to reintroduce children to nature, so that the soles of their feet may learn from the uneven ground, and their muscles from the cool of the water.
These moments are for thankfulness in the life that lives.
It is at the very end of the walk when I overbalance and fall on my arse—and am reminded of the eternal truth that rocks are hard. As I gingerly get up, my youngest daughter looks at me, caught between amusement and concern, and asks me if I’m okay.
I have to think before answering, because yes, physically I’m fine. But I feel too, an underlying sense of discomfort; it is that omnipresent pressure of existential awareness about the scale of suffering and ecological damage now at large in the world, made so much more immediately acute after Bondi; the dissonance that such horrors can somehow exist simultaneously with this small group being alive and happy in this place, on this earth-kissed afternoon.
How is it okay, to be “okay”? What is it to live with conscience in Wangat? Those of us who still have access to time, space, safety and high levels of volition on this planet carry this duality all the time, as our gift and obligation. It is not an easy thing to make sense of; but for me, it speaks to the question of ‘why Greenpeace’? Because the moral and strategic mission-focus of campaigning provides a principled basis for how each of us can bridge that interminable gulf.
The essence of campaigning is to make the world’s state of crisis legible and actionable, by isolating systemic threats to which we can rise and respond credibly, with resources allocated to activity in accordance with strategy. To be part of Greenpeace, whether as an activist, volunteer supporter or staff member, is to find a home for your worries for the world in confidence and faith that together we have the power to do something about it. Together we meet the confusion of the moment with the light of shared purpose and the confidence of direction.
So, it was as I was getting back up again from my tumble and considering my daughter’s question that I thought of you—with gratitude, and with love–-because we cross this bridge all the time, together, everyday; to face the present and the future.
‘Yes, my love’, I say to my daughter, smiling as I get to my feet, “I’m okay”. And I close my eyes and think of a world in which the fires are out, and everywhere, all tadpoles have the conditions of flourishing to be able to grow peacefully into frogs.
Thank you for being a part of Greenpeace.
With love,
David
Climate Change
Without Weighing Costs to Public Health, EPA Rolls Back Air Pollution Standards for Coal Plants
The federal Mercury and Air Toxics Standards for coal and oil-fired power plants were strengthened during the Biden administration.
Last week, when the Environmental Protection Agency finalized its repeal of tightened 2024 air pollution standards for power plants, the agency claimed the rollback would save $670 million.
Without Weighing Costs to Public Health, EPA Rolls Back Air Pollution Standards for Coal Plants
The case shows that climate change is a fundamental human rights violation—and the victory of Bonaire, a Dutch territory, could open the door for similar lawsuits globally.
From our collaborating partner Living on Earth, public radio’s environmental news magazine, an interview by Paloma Beltran with Greenpeace Netherlands campaigner Eefje de Kroon.
A Tiny Caribbean Island Sued the Netherlands Over Climate Change, and Won
-
Greenhouse Gases7 months ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Climate Change7 months ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Greenhouse Gases2 years ago嘉宾来稿：满足中国增长的用电需求 光伏加储能“比新建煤电更实惠”
-
Climate Change2 years ago
Bill Discounting Climate Change in Florida’s Energy Policy Awaits DeSantis’ Approval
-
Climate Change2 years ago
Spanish-language misinformation on renewable energy spreads online, report shows
-
Climate Change2 years ago嘉宾来稿：满足中国增长的用电需求 光伏加储能“比新建煤电更实惠”
-
Climate Change Videos2 years ago
The toxic gas flares fuelling Nigeria’s climate change – BBC News
-
Carbon Footprint2 years agoUS SEC’s Climate Disclosure Rules Spur Renewed Interest in Carbon Credits