Geoengineering: The Gamble

by Gernot Wagner

Stabilizing the world’s climates means cutting carbon dioxide pollution. There’s no way around it. But what if that’s not enough? What if it’s too difficult to accomplish in the time allotted or, worse, what if it’s so late in the game that even cutting carbon emissions to zero, tomorrow, wouldn’t do?

Enter solar geoengineering. The principle is attempt to cool Earth by reflecting more sunlight back into space. The primary mechanism, shooting particles into the upper atmosphere, implies more pollution, not less. If that doesn’t sound scary, it should. There are lots of risks, unknowns, and unknowables.

In The Gamble, climate economist Gernot Wagner provides a balanced take on the possible benefits and all-too-real risks, especially the so-called “moral hazard” that researching or even just discussing (solar) geoengineering would undermine the push to cut carbon emissions in the first place. Despite those risks, he argues, solar geoengineering may only be a matter of time. Not if, but when.

As the founding executive director of Harvard’s Solar Geoengineering Research Program, Wagner explores scenarios of a geoengineered future, offering an inside-view of the research already under way and the actions the world must take to guide it in a productive direction.

Genres: Science, Climate Change, Environment, Nonfiction

203 pages, Kindle Edition

Published September 8, 2021

About the author

Gernot Wagner is an economist at the Environmental Defense Fund. He teaches at Columbia and graduated from both Harvard and Stanford. He doesn’t eat meat, doesn’t drive, and knows full well the futility of his personal choices.

Reviews

[Miles · Rating 4 out of 5]

Summary:

Gernot Wagner’s Geoengineering: The Gamble is a primer on the history of solar geoengineering, the state of current research, and possibilities for future experimentation and deployment. In a succinct and balanced fashion, Wagner discusses the various technical ways solar geoengineering might be implemented, as well as the morass of ethical and geopolitical problems that deployment may pose. The book lays out the incentives for and against solar geoengineering (including possible negative and positive side effects), presents three imaginary near-future deployment scenarios, and explores broad questions of “governance”––how to responsibly and rationally conduct international discussions and research so as to better understand this powerful technology that is both potentially dangerous and perhaps necessary to mitigate the worst effects of climate change.

Key Concepts and Notes:

––Framing solar geoengineering as a planetary-scale “gamble,” the key question is: Given how far carbon emissions have been allowed to proceed to this point and the anticipated climate consequences, is it a greater gamble to use solar geonengineering or not to?
––Another critical question is: Even if we do implement geoengineering at some point, who does “we” mean in this context? Wagner adroitly investigates this question using both game theory and practical scenarios.
––Wagner is adamant that the only sensible use of geoengineering would occur within the context of a greater climate plan, one that would necessarily include both aggressive carbon emissions reductions as well as a massive ramp-up of carbon capture technology. Solar geoengineering is in no way a silver bullet to solve our carbon woes, especially given that it does not address the root cause of global warming.
––Wagner considers whether solar geoengineering may become a “green moral hazard” that would discourage adoption of other essential climate solutions. He also considers the possibility of an “inverse moral hazard” effect that may actually hasten emissions reductions due to fears about geoengineering’s potential negative side effects.
––Wagner remains staunchly neutral for most of the book, insisting that we should be neither eager to deploy solar geoengineering nor completely unwilling to consider it. Toward the end, he advocates for more and better geoengineering research, and also asserts that an international moratorium on deployment is probably a good idea for the time being.
––Personally, I’m on the fence as to whether a moratorium is a good idea. I can definitely see the sense in it, but I also worry that it may discourage much-needed practical experimentation as the climate clock continues to tick. Wagner states repeatedly that we’re in a “not if, but when” relationship with solar geoengineering, so if he’s right my instinct is that deploying sooner is better than later. That said, I firmly believe that initial deployment should be gradual and globally-coordinated, and that proper safety protocols should be set up to roll it back if unacceptable negative side effects are observed.

Favorite Quotes:

The only appropriate way to look at the impacts of solar geoengineering is in the full context of where the world’s climate is heading already.

Viewed in isolation, (solar) geoengineering looks simply mad. Why develop a technology akin to a global thermostat, if it isn’t to try to address a real problem? View it with this underlying problem front and center, (solar) geoengineering indeed looks very different. (45-6)

We simply don’t yet know enough to make any kind of definitive decision about whether solar geoengineering overall might be good or bad. We do know much more research is needed. That research needs to include both natural and social sciences. The mere thought of solar geoengineering invokes something clearly visceral. Scientific facts alone can only do so much to assuage those feelings. In the end, solar engineering is unnatural and uncertain; it’s a technofix in the purest sense of the term. (73)

The only sensible way to approach either carbon removal or solar geoengineering…is not as an either-or but as a yes-and. Neither should stand on its own but must instead be seen as part of a much broader climate policy portfolio that includes cutting CO2 emissions in the first place, as well as plenty of adaptation to what’s already in store. That also makes any geoengineering deployment scenario neither a first nor a last resort. (126-7)

What often keeps be up at night––quite literally, frankly––is the fear that we might be slithering toward deployment of solar geoengineering without having done the hard work. That we––as researchers––are missing something fundamental and that time just isn’t on our side. It took a quarter-century after the eruption of Mt. Pinatubo lowering global average temperatures by 0.5 degrees Celsius for that first Nature cover article to estimate the agricultural effects of scattering sunlight. A quarter-century.

Meanwhile, people are dying from unmitigated climate change today! The clear answer, of course, is to mitigate: cut CO2 emissions, now. That may well be the best use of solar geoengineering today: scare people into wanting to mitigate more (See moral hazard, inverse). But what if deploying solar geoengineering, arguably another form of mitigation, might indeed save more people sooner?

Put slightly more philosophically: At what point did not cutting enough CO2 turn from an error of omission to an error of commission? If we believe we’ve crossed that threshold––and I certainly do––at what point then does something similar apply to geoengineering?

That is precisely where we return to the “gamble” inherent in solar geoengineering. Pursuing it is risky, perhaps unduly so. Not acting is similarly risky, perhaps even more so. No simple benefit-cost analysis will tell us which way to go. The decision is all about risk-risk tradeoffs, putting the risks of unmitigated climate change against the risks of potentially pursuing solar geoengineering.

That’s a highly uncomfortable position to be in. It’s a gamble, and a planetary-scale one at that. It’s also a gamble we aren’t being asked to participate in, or perhaps to observe as a neutral spectators. It’s a gamble we’re being pushed to play: “not if, but when." I for one would much rather have us be prepared when that time comes. (144-5)

This review was originally published on my blog, words&dirt.

[J.B. Siewers · Rating 4 out of 5]

Geoengineering should be a part of the solution + carbon recapturing + aggressive CO2 cuts+ adaptation : for this to take place there needs a major uptick in funding/experiment's/study ; the risks are great , the risk for not moving forward are greater ; Excellent footnotes, references and a deep dive into the variables/risks of getting it wrong :

[James · Rating 5 out of 5]

This is an extremely informative and useful book. I highly recommend it to anyone that is even slightly concerned about climate change.

Geoengineering is the sword that hangs over the climate change 'question'. It says: "...remove carbon emissions from human activity or else the only solution is the one no one wants".

Here is the challenge:
1) Read this book and get yourself fully informed...
Then;
2) Explain to politicians, business leaders, military types, academics, and preachers that the choice is to solve the problem, or they will have to argue for a solution that will be worse than decarbonization.

[Mark Vargas · Rating 2 out of 5]

I suppose that anyone reading this book already knows a fair amount about climate change and probably some amount about geoengineering. The author does a decent job of explaining the basics and also illustrates several non-intuitive scenarios. However, the entire book could have been written in an article as the author explains the same ideas many times and in many subtle differences. My largest objection is that the author has a clear bias and although he shows evidence, studies, and models for the benefits of geoengineering, he is clearly against its deployment, yet has not evidence to back up his "intuition" that we humans should not be tinkering with the climate (although we clearly are way past that point). It reminds me of the group of people that are against nuclear energy at all costs and refuse to look at the hard evidence.

I initially gave this a 1-star, but after reviewing my notes I did learn some new information from this author and am grateful that I read it.

[nicole · Rating 5 out of 5]

I am a bit hesitant to give this 5 stars because of my built in bias. I also am really bad at reading academic literature, so this review might be bad. This book does a really good job of showing the potentiality of solar geoengineering and its role in the future of society, including potential risks, benefits and drawbacks of its implementation. I like that the book argues our need for more information as well as potential scenarios that could play out, instead of making strong claims in one direction. I knew nothing about geoengineering prior to reading this, but now I feel like now I fully understand the concept without feeling swayed in one specific direction.

[Sevgi Helin · Rating 4 out of 5]

Böyle bir konuda kitabı Gernot Wagner yazmış olmasaydı, okuyacağımı asla düşünmezdim. Konunun çok ilginç olduğunu düşünüyorum. Benim için bu alandaki ilk exposure oldu. Kitap detaylı, yer yer tekrara düşerek eleştirilere yanıt veriyor. Anlatım biraz dağınık ama sanırım profesörün herhangi bir konuşmasını dinleyenler için bu sürpriz olmaz. Daha önce yapılan bias yorumuna katılıyorum; net bir bias var. Zaten arka kapakta da “not if but when” sorusunun önemli olduğunu söylüyor. Tekrarlayacağım, böyle bir bias’ın Prof.Wagner’dan gelmesi, bias’a da ilginç bir katman ekliyor

[Carter · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is one of those books, I am not sure if, I should have an opinion about at this point. The case for geoengineering, and the conumdrums envolved. The science, however is not addressed- so whether the case should be made is up in the air.

[Andrew Clough · Rating 4 out of 5]

Short and could possibly have been even shorter but useful and important nonetheless.

[Blair Carroll · Rating 4 out of 5]

Wonderfully informative and unbiased book.

[Mike · Rating 5 out of 5]

Sobering and honest assessment of the risks of inaction and the risks of acting without preparation.

[Randall Parker · Rating 5 out of 5]

Well reasoned, informative, with great expertise

Gernot Wagner co-founded, with David Keith, Harvard's Solar Geoengineering Research Program. Wagner is an economist who specializes in climate research and warming. His specific focus is on the potential positive and negative impacts of potential solar geoengineering, specifically using high altitude aerosol release to reflect away enough light that the effects of global warming would be reduced.

Wagner quantifies the quite low and affordable costs of geoengineering to cut warming. He sees the use of this technique as inevitable because of how challenging to humans the climate will become in some parts of the world. His great worry is that enough research will not be done before this technique is applied. This might lead to unforeseen damaging side effects.

I agree with the inevitability. Governments that aren't willing to act now will change their minds under severe heat, failing crops, and rising oceans.

I like how many factors he considers and how calmly he covers the issues with geoengineering, including governance, risks, and benefits. The book is quite informative.

I would like to have seen better development of the argument for why he sees the eventual use of this technique as so likely. For example, more data on how severe temperatures will become and whether some areas might even become uninhabitable for part of each year.

You will not be challenged by physics or math. The book is easy to understand. Wagner is an economist, and he's writing from a social scientist's perspective.

My own big worry is we will wait too long before experimenting with this technique at much lower levels of application. Much could be learned this way. Once things get bad enough, some desperate countries could suddenly just start doing SO2 aerosol injection at high altitudes by using balloons. More expensive than designing special aircraft for this but much quicker to implement.