Solar geoengineering could save 400,000 lives a year

When it comes to finding solutions to climate change, there’s no shortage of technologies vying for attention, from renewable energy to electric vehicles to nuclear energy. One such candidate, solar geoengineering, claims to be able to rapidly cool the Earth, limit emissions and give the world time to fully implement efforts to remove carbon from the atmosphere. Supported by supporters.

But that promise comes with risks. This could potentially lead to worsening air quality or depletion of ozone in the atmosphere, both of which can pose serious health problems in their own right.

Although these risks merit further consideration, a new study published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences led by Georgia Tech’s School of Public Policy suggests that solar geoengineering could save as many as 400,000 lives a year through reduced temperature-related deaths. This suggests that it may be salvageable. to climate change.

“A key question is how the climate risk reductions from solar geoengineering compare with the additional risks associated with its use,” said lead author Anthony Harding from the School of Public Policy.

“This study provides a first step in quantifying the risks and benefits of solar geoengineering and shows that for the risks we considered, the potential to save lives outweighs the direct risks. .”

Harding co-authored the PNAS article with Gabriel Vecchi and Wenqiang Yang of Princeton University and David Keith of the University of Chicago.

The researchers studied a climate change mitigation strategy called stratospheric aerosol injection (SAI). This is a type of solar geoengineering that involves spraying small reflective particles into the upper atmosphere. These particles would send some of the sunlight back into space, helping to cool the Earth.

To examine the extent to which solar geoengineering would affect mortality rates, the authors investigated the extent to which solar geoengineering would affect mortality rates, assuming an average temperature increase of 2.5 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels and a similar approach to climate change. used computer models and historical data on how the effects of cancer on mortality rates. current world.

They found that lowering Earth’s temperature by 1 degree Celsius through solar geoengineering would save 400,000 lives each year. This is 13 times greater than the deaths caused by direct health risks from solar geoengineering through air pollution and ozone layer depletion. This means that the number of lives saved by solar geoengineering is 13 times greater. The cooling caused by solar geoengineering is 13 times the number of lives potentially lost due to the known risks of solar geoengineering.

Many of those deaths could be avoided in hotter, poorer regions, the study says. Cooler, wealthier regions may actually experience more cold-related deaths.

Solar geoengineering has generated millions of dollars in funding, and researchers across the country say the federal government should provide millions more for research and development of risk analyzes similar to those created by Harding’s team. Recommended by the Academy of Sciences. But the technology has also drawn concerns from the Union of Concerned Scientists and others. The group says there are too many environmental, ethical and geopolitical risks to proceed without further research.

The authors caution that while their study is an important starting point for a deeper understanding of the potential and dangers of solar geoengineering, it is far from a comprehensive assessment of the risks and benefits of this technology. There is.

They say their model is based on ideal assumptions about aerosol distribution, population and income growth, and other factors. Nor can it capture all of the real-world complexities involved in solar geoengineering.

Their research also highlights the potential risks of solar geoengineering, including its potential impacts on ecosystems and world politics, and the potential for governments to rely on the technology to delay politically difficult emissions cuts. He points out that it doesn’t address everything.

Still, the researchers say their study shows that for many regions, solar geoengineering may be more effective at saving lives than emissions reductions alone, and could help determine the best way to cool a warming planet. As the world searches, this suggests that combining solar geoengineering is worth continuing.

“There is no perfect solution to the climate crisis,” Harding said. “Solar geoengineering involves risks, but it also has the potential to reduce real suffering.Therefore, we are comparing the risks and benefits to provide information that will help inform future decisions regarding this technology. It needs to be deeply understood.”