Connect with us

Published

on

The European Union should  “proactively negotiate” for a global regime that governs controversial technologies designed to cool the planet– and push to prevent their deployment, the union’s scientific advisors have said.

The recommendations from the EU’s chief scientific advisors mark the first time the union has received scientific advice on a highly divisive group of technologies known as “Solar Radiation Management” (SRM).

SRM technologies are designed to temporary relieve the world from extreme heat by blocking some of the sun’s warming impacts. This could include pumping aerosols into the high atmosphere, spraying saltwater into clouds to brighten them, or even sending mirrors into orbit to reflect more sunlight away from the Earth.

These technologies wouldn’t address the root cause of climate change – namely rising heat-trapping greenhouse gas emissions – nor could they address the impacts of those emissions on ocean acidification for example.

“At best, they would reduce warming from solar radiation on a temporary and local scale,” the scientific opinion notes.

Risky strategy

It’s a risky strategy. Deploying SRM carries major uncertainties and wide-ranging risks, that are poorly understood.

SRM deployment is “likely to bring substantial negative ecological and economic effects, including changing patterns of rainfall, impacts on ecosystems, a decrease in the security of food production and in the potential of solar energy,” the report warns.

World Bank raises $100 billion for poor nations in boost for climate finance

The EU doesn’t have an official position on SRM although it “does not consider SRM as a solution”, according to a policy scoping paper, which describes the technologies as “an unacceptable risk for humans and the environment”.

Last year, the EU’s then Green Deal chief Frans Timmermans requested advice from the union’s seven scientific advisors to help define a common position.

In response, the advisors have urged the EU to prioritise reducing greenhouse gas emissions and focus on adaptation to climate impact as the main solutions to global warming.

The uncertainties associated with deploying SRM are inconsistent with Europe’s “do no harm” principles and decision-makers should agree an EU-wide moratorium, they concluded.

At the same time, SRM is gaining more attention as a potential cheap and fast solution to reduce overheating as the world barrels towards overshooting the 1.5C warming threshold above which scientists have warned of catastrophic climate change. “Cooling credits”, which at least one company using SRM technology is already selling at small-scale, should be banned from being used to meet international climate obligations, the advisors added.

Wild West

Yet, there is no international framework governing SRM activities.

Biden uses only Africa visit to promote “game changer” railway for copper and cobalt

A de facto moratorium was agreed in 2010 by members of the UN Convention on Biological Diversity, with exceptions for small-scale scientific research studies – but the decision isn’t legally binding and the United States is not member to the treaty

The EU should take a leading role in negotiating a global governance system and push for the “non-deployment of SRM in the foreseeable future”, with exemption for “limited outdoor research” that meet a set of conditions and risk considerations, the advisors argue.

Besides a ban on large-scale outdoor experiments, they recommended the creation of “clear ethical requirements” and guidelines for smaller research projects. Any public funding for SRM research should not replace financing climate action and scientific evidence for researching and using the technology should be reassessed every five to 10 years, they added.

The EU Commission has previously expressed support for discussions on a global governance framework, including for research. But recent attempts to find a global consensus on how to regulate SRM activities have failed.

Hibaa Ismael, a lead negotiator for the African Group at the UN Environment Assembly, told Climate Home that the EU should “uphold its opposition to solar radiation management” and “collaborate with African and Pacific governments to champion a global non-use agreement, ensuring that this risky and uncertain technology is neither developed nor deployed”.

For Janos Pasztor, a veteran climate scientists and diplomat who has long argued for an SRM governance mechanism, the advice could put “oil on the wheels” to get the issue considered with the UN system.

The alternative is letting the nascent industry mark its own homework, he told Climate Home, citing his recent experience as a consultant for US-Israeli startup Stardust Solutions, which is developing its own code of conduct for launching reflective particles into the stratosphere.

“Governance is needed whether you want to you to make use of SRM or have a framework to ensure that you stop the kind of activities that we have seen, or provide a framework within which they can operate properly and safely,” he said.

But allowing outdoor research and testing of SRM technologies is highly contested, even at small-scale.

Proponents of research like Matthias Honegger, of the Brussels-based think-tank Centre for Future Generations, argue public-funded research is necessary to inform discussions and allow governments to make informed decisions on the potential use of SRM.

“If the EU doesn’t research it, there’s a real risk of not being ready to actually shape the global conversation,” he said, welcoming the advice.

Slippery slope

Critics argue allowing outdoor testing provides “a slippery slope” that risks normalising the technology towards future deployment.

Aarti Gupta, is a member of the expert group which reviewed evidence on which the advice was made and the co-initiator of an academic initiative calling for the non-use of solar geoengineering, which has been signed by more than 500 scientists.

She described the recommendations as going in the right direction but cautioned about allowing outdoor research, even with strong guardrails.

“There’s no amount of small-scale research or anything which will tell us what we actually want to know on the consequences of using SRM at planetary scale,” she told Climate Home.

“We find it very important that there should be an international norm shift, that we should not be talking about SRM as an option. It’s too risky to keep it on the table.”

(Reporting by Chloé Farand; editing Joe Lo) 

The post EU should push for global deal not to deploy solar geoengineering, advisors say appeared first on Climate Home News.

EU should push for global deal to curb solar geoengineering, advisors say

Continue Reading

Climate Change

Corpus Christi Cuts Timeline to Disaster as Abbott Issues Emergency Orders

Published

on

The governor’s office said the city’s two main reservoirs could dry up by May, much sooner than previous timelines. But authorities still offer no plan for curtailment of water use.

City officials in Corpus Christi on Tuesday released modeling that showed emergency cuts to water demand could be required as soon as May as reservoir levels continue to decline.

Corpus Christi Cuts Timeline to Disaster as Abbott Issues Emergency Orders

Continue Reading

Climate Change

Middle East war is another wake-up call for fossil fuel-reliant food systems

Published

on

Lena Luig is the head of the International Agricultural Policy Division at the Heinrich Böll Foundation, a member of the Global Alliance for the Future of Food. Anna Lappé is the Executive Director of the Global Alliance for the Future of Food.

As toxic clouds loom over Tehran and Beirut from the US and Israel’s bombardment of oil depots and civilian infrastructure in the region’s ongoing war, the world is once again witnessing the not-so-subtle connections between conflict, hunger, food insecurity and the vulnerability of global food systems dependent on fossil fuels, dominated by a few powerful countries and corporations.

The conflict in Iran is having a huge impact on the world’s fertilizer supply. The Strait of Hormuz is a critical trade route in the region for nearly half of the global supply of urea, the main synthetic fertilizer derived from natural gas through the conversion of ammonia.

With the Strait impacted by Iran’s blockades, prices of urea have shot up by 35% since the war started, just as planting season starts in many parts of the world, putting millions of farmers and consumers at risk of increasing production costs and food price spikes, resulting in food insecurity, particularly for low-income households. The World Food Programme has projected that an extra 45 million people would be pushed ​into acute hunger because of rises in food, oil and shipping costs, if the war continues until June.

Pesticides and synthetic fertilizer leave system fragile

On the face of it, this looks like a supply chain issue, but at the core of this crisis lies a truth about many of our food systems around the world: the instability and injustice in the very design of systems so reliant on these fossil fuel inputs for our food.

At the Global Alliance, a strategic alliance of philanthropic foundations working to transform food systems, we have been documenting the fossil fuel-food nexus, raising alarm about the fragility of a system propped up by fossil fuels, with 15% of annual fossil fuel use going into food systems, in part because of high-cost, fossil fuel-based inputs like pesticides and synthetic fertilizer. The Heinrich Böll Foundation has also been flagging this threat consistently, most recently in the Pesticide Atlas and Soil Atlas compendia. 

We’ve seen this before: Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022 sparked global disruptions in fertilizer supply and food price volatility. As the conflict worsened, fertilizer prices spiked – as much from input companies capitalizing on the crisis for speculation as from real cost increases from production and transport – triggering a food price crisis around the world.

    Since then, fertilizer industry profit margins have continued to soar. In 2022, the largest nine fertilizer producers increased their profit margins by more than 35% compared to the year before—when fertilizer prices were already high. As Lena Bassermann and Dr. Gideon Tups underscore in the Heinrich Böll Foundation’s Soil Atlas, the global dependencies of nitrogen fertilizer impacted economies around the world, especially state budgets in already indebted and import-dependent economies, as well as farmers across Africa.

    Learning lessons from the war in Ukraine, many countries invested heavily in renewable energy and/or increased domestic oil production as a way to decrease dependency on foreign fossil fuels. But few took the same approach to reimagining domestic food systems and their food sovereignty.

    Agroecology as an alternative

    There is another way. Governments can adopt policy frameworks to encourage reductions in synthetic fertilizer and pesticide use, especially in regions that currently massively overuse nitrogen fertilizer. At the African Union fertilizer and Soil Health Summit in 2024, African leaders at least agreed that organic fertilizers should be subsidized as well, not only mineral fertilizers, but we can go farther in actively promoting agricultural pathways that reduce fossil fuel dependency. 

    In 2024, the Global Alliance organized dozens of philanthropies to call for a tenfold increase in investments to help farmers transition from fossil fuel dependency towards agroecological approaches that prioritize livelihoods, health, climate, and biodiversity.

    In our research, we detail the huge opportunity to repurpose harmful subsidies currently supporting inputs like synthetic fertilizer and pesticides towards locally-sourced bio-inputs and biofertilizer production. We know this works: There are powerful stories of hope and change from those who have made this transition, despite only receiving a fraction of the financing that industrial agriculture receives, with evidence of benefits from stable incomes and livelihoods to better health and climate outcomes.

    New summit in Colombia seeks to revive stalled UN talks on fossil fuel transition

    Inspiring examples abound: G-BIACK in Kenya is training farmers how to produce their own high-quality compost; start-ups like the Evola Company in Cambodia are producing both nutrient-rich organic fertilizer and protein-rich animal feed with black soldier fly farming; Sabon Sake in Ghana is enriching sugarcane bagasse – usually organic waste – with microbial agents and earthworms to turn it into a rich vermicompost.

    These efforts, grounded in ecosystems and tapping nature for soil fertility and to manage pest pressures, are just some of the countless examples around the world, tapping the skill and knowledge of millions of farmers. On a national and global policy level, the Agroecology Coalition, with 480+ members, including governments, civil society organizations, academic institutions, and philanthropic foundations, is supporting a transition toward agroecology, working with natural systems to produce abundant food, boost biodiversity, and foster community well-being.

    Fertilizer industry spins “clean” products

    We must also inoculate ourselves from the fertilizer industry’s public relations spin, which includes promoting the promise that their products can be produced without heavy reliance on fossil fuels. Despite experts debunking the viability of what the industry has dubbed “green hydrogen” or “green or clean ammonia”, the sector still promotes this narrative, arguing that these are produced with resource-intensive renewable energy or Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS), a costly and unreliable technology for reducing emissions.

    As we mourn this conflict’s senseless destruction and death, including hundreds of children, we also recognize that peace cannot mean a return to business-as-usual. We need to upend the systems that allow the richest and most powerful to have dominion over so much.

    This includes fighting for a food system that is based on genuine sovereignty and justice, free from dependency on fossil fuels, one that honors natural systems and puts power into the hands of communities and food producers themselves.

    The post Middle East war is another wake-up call for fossil fuel-reliant food systems appeared first on Climate Home News.

    Middle East war is another wake-up call for fossil fuel-reliant food systems

    Continue Reading

    Climate Change

    Are There Climate Fingerprints in Tornado Activity?

    Published

    on

    Parts of the Southern and Northeastern U.S. faced tornado threats this week. Scientists are trying to parse out the climate links in changing tornado activity.

    It’s been a weird few weeks for weather across the United States.

    Are There Climate Fingerprints in Tornado Activity?

    Continue Reading

    Trending

    Copyright © 2022 BreakingClimateChange.com