The Risk of Termination Shock From Solar Geoengineering

If solar geoengineering were to be deployed so as to mask a high level of global warming, and then stopped suddenly, there would be a rapid and damaging rise in temperatures. This effect is often referred to as termination shock, and it is an influential concept. Based on studies of its potential impacts, commentators often cite termination shock as one of the greatest risks of solar geoengineering. However, there has been little consideration of the likelihood of termination shock, so that conclusions about its risk are premature. This paper explores the physical characteristics of termination shock, then uses simple scenario analysis to plot out the pathways by which different driver events (such as terrorist attacks, natural disasters, or political action) could lead to termination. It then considers where timely policies could intervene to avert termination shock. We conclude that some relatively simple policies could protect a solar geoengineering system against most of the plausible drivers. If backup deployment hardware were maintained and if solar geoengineering were implemented by agreement among just a few powerful countries, then the system should be resilient against all but the most extreme catastrophes. If this analysis is correct, then termination shock should be much less likely, and therefore much less of a risk, than has previously been assumed. Much more sophisticated scenario analysis—going beyond simulations purely of worst‐case scenarios—will be needed to allow for more insightful policy conclusions.

[1]  L. Kaldor The World Economic Outlook , 1983 .

[2]  J. Latham,et al.  Control of global warming? , 1990, Nature.

[3]  Larry W. Thomason,et al.  Radiative forcing from the 1991 Mount Pinatubo volcanic eruption , 1998 .

[4]  P. Crutzen Albedo Enhancement by Stratospheric Sulfur Injections: A Contribution to Resolve a Policy Dilemma? , 2006 .

[5]  Ken Caldeira,et al.  Transient climate–carbon simulations of planetary geoengineering , 2007, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[6]  I. V. Heerden,et al.  The Failure of the New Orleans Levee System Following Hurricane Katrina and the Pathway Forward , 2007 .

[7]  P. Rasch,et al.  An overview of geoengineering of climate using stratospheric sulphate aerosols , 2008, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences.

[8]  Georgiy L. Stenchikov,et al.  Regional climate responses to geoengineering with tropical and Arctic SO2 injections , 2008 .

[9]  Ben Kravitz,et al.  Benefits, risks, and costs of stratospheric geoengineering , 2009 .

[10]  William Finnegan,et al.  Modification of cirrus clouds to reduce global warming , 2009 .

[11]  David Archer,et al.  Geoengineering climate by stratospheric sulfur injections: Earth system vulnerability to technological failure , 2009 .

[12]  K. Keller,et al.  The economics (or lack thereof) of aerosol geoengineering , 2009 .

[13]  P. Jones,et al.  The Influence of Stratospheric Sulphate Aerosol Deployment on the Surface Air Temperature and the Risk of an Abrupt Global Warming , 2010 .

[14]  Climate Geoengineering: Solar Radiation Management and its Implications for Intergenerational Equity , 2011 .

[15]  K. Taylor,et al.  The Geoengineering Model Intercomparison Project (GeoMIP) , 2011 .

[16]  Ryan L. Sriver,et al.  Tension between reducing sea-level rise and global warming through solar-radiation management , 2012 .

[17]  Ken Caldeira,et al.  Climate response to changes in atmospheric carbon dioxide and solar irradiance on the time scale of days to weeks , 2012 .

[18]  David William Keith,et al.  Cost analysis of stratospheric albedo modification delivery systems , 2012 .

[19]  R. K. Dixon Algae based biofuels , 2012, Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change.

[20]  Takanobu Kosugi,et al.  Fail-safe solar radiation management geoengineering , 2013, Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change.

[21]  T. Lenton,et al.  Interactions between reducing CO2 emissions, CO2 removal and solar radiation management , 2012, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences.

[22]  C. Bitz,et al.  The Climate Response to Stratospheric Sulfate Injections and Implications for Addressing Climate Emergencies , 2012 .

[23]  P. Jones,et al.  Quantifying uncertainties in global and regional temperature change using an ensemble of observational estimates: The HadCRUT4 data set , 2012 .

[24]  Might Solar Radiation Management Constitute a Dilemma , 2012 .

[25]  R. Knutti,et al.  Robustness and uncertainties in the new CMIP5 climate model projections , 2013 .

[26]  M. Zürn,et al.  The Paradox of Climate Engineering , 2013 .

[27]  S. Baum,et al.  Double catastrophe: intermittent stratospheric geoengineering induced by societal collapse , 2013, Environment Systems & Decisions.

[28]  C. Bretherton,et al.  Clouds and Aerosols , 2013 .

[29]  Clive Hamilton,et al.  Earthmasters: The Dawn of the Age of Climate Engineering , 2013 .

[30]  K. Caldeira,et al.  Projections of the pace of warming following an abrupt increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration , 2013 .

[31]  Nicholas Frank Pidgeon,et al.  The Oxford Principles , 2013, Climatic Change.

[32]  Shingo Watanabe,et al.  The impact of abrupt suspension of solar radiation management (termination effect) in experiment G2 of the Geoengineering Model Intercomparison Project (GeoMIP) , 2013 .

[33]  A. Corner,et al.  Deliberating stratospheric aerosols for climate geoengineering and the SPICE project , 2013 .

[34]  Nick Bostrom,et al.  Existential Risk Prevention as Global Priority , 2013 .

[35]  Cecilia M. Bitz,et al.  Rapid and extensive warming following cessation of solar radiation management , 2014 .

[36]  Ken Caldeira,et al.  Solar geoengineering to limit the rate of temperature change , 2014, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences.

[37]  B. Kravitz,et al.  Arctic cryosphere response in the Geoengineering Model Intercomparison Project G3 and G4 scenarios , 2014 .

[38]  S. Barrett Solar Geoengineering’s Brave New World: Thoughts on the Governance of an Unprecedented Technology , 2014, Review of Environmental Economics and Policy.

[39]  Utku Kânoğlu,et al.  The Fukushima accident was preventable , 2015, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences.

[40]  E. Fischer,et al.  Differential climate impacts for policy-relevant limits to global warming: the case of 1.5 °C and 2 °C , 2015 .

[41]  Introduction : La parentalité entre science et idéologie , 2015 .

[42]  George Gessert,et al.  This Changes Everything: Capitalism vs. the Climate , 2015, Leonardo.

[43]  Scott Kulp,et al.  Consequences of twenty-first-century policy for multi-millennial climate and sea-level change , 2016 .

[44]  Kooiti Masuda,et al.  The cost of stratospheric climate engineering revisited , 2017, Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change.

[45]  Rebecca K. Smith,et al.  Key impacts of climate engineering on biodiversity and ecosystems, with priorities for future research , 2016 .

[46]  J. Lezaun,et al.  Crafting a public for geoengineering , 2015, Public understanding of science.

[47]  Jessica Gurevitch,et al.  Potentially dangerous consequences for biodiversity of solar geoengineering implementation and termination , 2018, Nature Ecology & Evolution.