Counter-Geoengineering: Feasibility and Policy Implications for a Geoengineered World

TL;DR

This paper examines the feasibility and policy challenges of geoengineering and counter-geoengineering, emphasizing the need for global governance to prevent malicious or uncoordinated climate interventions, using Russia as a case study.

Contribution

It highlights the vulnerability of moderate geoengineering to countermeasures and advocates for international governance to manage geoengineering deployment.

Findings

Counter-geoengineering can nullify moderate geoengineering effects.

Effective geoengineering requires a global governance framework.

Russia's methane release could serve as a counter-geoengineering method.

Abstract

With the increasing urgency of climate change's impacts and limited success in reducing emissions, "geoengineering," or the artificial manipulation of the climate to reduce warming rates, has been proposed as an alternative short-term solution. Options range from taking carbon out of the atmosphere through carbon sinks and brightening clouds to increasing the planet's albedo through the release of reflective particles into the atmosphere. While still controversial, geoengineering has been proposed by some as a promising and low-cost way of combating climate change. In particular, so-called 'moderate' geoengineering is claimed to be achievable with few potential side effects or other ramifications. However, this paper argues that the effect of moderate geoengineering can easily be nullified by 'counter-geoengineering,' and any impactful geoengineering would require a global governance framework to prevent countries which benefit from warming temperatures from deploying counter-geoengineering. In this paper, we take Russia as an example due to its potential interest in counteracting geoengineering and its significant ability to release a great amount of methane, a viable counter-geoengineering pathway in the short term.