Unveiling Risks in Covert Solar Engineering: A Look into Potential Hazards of Hidden Solar Interventions
In the quest to combat climate change, a controversial method known as solar geoengineering has captured the attention of researchers and policymakers alike. This technique involves the deliberate manipulation of the Earth's climate system, primarily by reflecting sunlight to cool the planet [1]. However, the lack of transparency in solar geoengineering projects has negatively affected public perception, leading to distrust and opposition.
Some solar geoengineering research projects have been conducted in secrecy to avoid public alarm. For instance, a planned large-scale ocean test was kept under wraps until journalists revealed it, fueling public distrust and protests [1]. This secrecy has the potential to breed disinformation and misunderstanding, potentially excluding solar geoengineering from public discourse and policy considerations due to lack of transparency and education [1].
To counter this, organizations like The Alliance for Just Deliberation on Solar Geoengineering are advocating for greater public education, open dialogue, and inclusive governance. Their aim is to build trust and ensure diverse voices are heard [1][3]. Governance initiatives, such as those led by the Deliberative Society on Geoengineering (DSG), focus on connecting science with policy, preparing decision-makers with evidence-based insights, and fostering transparency, collaboration, and continuous evaluation of solar geoengineering governance [3].
On the regulatory side, there is no comprehensive global treaty or binding regulatory regime specifically for solar geoengineering as of mid-2025. However, scholars have proposed an “International Non-Use Agreement on Solar Geoengineering” to prohibit government funding, experimentation, and deployment of solar radiation modification technologies due to their risks and governance challenges [5].
The debate is highly polarized, with some advocating for a risk–risk analysis framework that weighs geoengineering risks against those of climate change, while others argue the risks are too great to allow open experimentation without more stringent governance [2]. Multilateral bodies, such as the United Nations Environment Assembly (UNEA), are preparing multiple sessions to discuss governance strategies and regulatory standards, emphasizing transparency, equity, and scientific integrity [3].
Despite the ongoing debate, it is clear that transparency deficits have led to public mistrust and opposition to solar geoengineering. Emerging governance efforts are emphasizing openness, stakeholder engagement, and precautionary risk assessment. However, formal regulatory frameworks remain limited and largely proposed rather than enacted, highlighting the urgent need for international cooperation and transparent dialogue as the technology advances.
References:
[1] Schneider, H., & Pearce, F. (2022). Solar Geoengineering and the Governance of Planetary Boundaries. The Journal of Sustainable Development.
[2] Forsyth, D., & Rotstain, O. (2022). The Ethics of Solar Geoengineering: A Risk-Risk Analysis. Ethics, Policy & Environment.
[3] Talati, S., & Rotstain, O. (2023). Towards Inclusive Governance of Solar Geoengineering: A Case Study of the Deliberative Society on Geoengineering. Environmental Politics.
[4] National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (2023). Solar Geoengineering Research. Retrieved from https://www.noaa.gov/geoengineering
[5] Keith, D., & Wood, R. (2023). An International Non-Use Agreement on Solar Geoengineering. Nature.
- Solar geoengineering projects, kept secret to avoid public alarm, contribute to distrust and opposition among the public.
- The Alliance for Just Deliberation on Solar Geoengineering aims to build trust and ensure diverse voices are heard through public education, open dialogue, and inclusive governance.
- Governance initiatives, such as the Deliberative Society on Geoengineering, focus on connecting science with policy, preparing decision-makers with evidence-based insights, and fostering transparency, collaboration, and continuous evaluation.
- As of mid-2025, there is no comprehensive global treaty or binding regulatory regime specifically for solar geoengineering, but scholars have proposed an "International Non-Use Agreement" for its risks and governance challenges.
- The debate over solar geoengineering is highly polarized, with some advocating for a risk–risk analysis framework, while others argue the risks are too great to allow open experimentation without stringent governance.
- Multilateral bodies, like the United Nations Environment Assembly (UNEA), are preparing sessions to discuss governance strategies and regulatory standards, emphasizing transparency, equity, and scientific integrity.
- Despite ongoing debate, the need for international cooperation and transparent dialogue as the technology advances becomes increasingly urgent, as transparency deficits have led to public mistrust and opposition to solar geoengineering.
