The survey *only *refers to "*stratospheric sulfur aerosols*". Would the results be different if respondents were presented *only *"*marine cloud brightening*"?
"*Information text about SRM presented to respondents at the beginning of the survey*." *Solar Radiation Management in Brief:* When it comes to counteracting the negative consequences of climate change, policy makers and scientists often talk about something called “solar radiation management” (SRM). The aim of SRM is to cool the Earth by reflecting small amounts of the sun's light and its heat back into space. *One way to do this is to place a fine mist of sulfur aerosols into the atmosphere, about 20 kilometers above the Earth’s surface.* This would need to be done every year for many consecutive years. Airplanes fitted with special equipment can achieve this job. Once in the stratosphere, the aerosols will scatter sunlight back into space reducing the amount of sunlight reaching the ground. In this sense, the aerosols act as small mirrors that reflect the sunlight. As a consequence, the planet becomes cooler and the warming effect of climate change can partially be offset. This effect has been observed to occur naturally after the eruption of large volcanoes. Discussions amongst scientists and policy makers about SRM reveal benefits as well as risks: • In terms of benefits, SRM can be put into practice relatively cheaply (even for the world’s poorer countries), and could cut the average rate of global warming in half over the next 50 years or so. • In terms of risks, SRM may damage the ozone layer, and the sulfur aerosols injected in the higher atmosphere may cause acid rain. Many things about SRM are still unknown. For example, the regional effects of SRM may not be equal: Some places may become better off, as a result of more moderate temperatures. At the same time, other places may become worse off because of more severe droughts. SRM may reduce the temperature on earth and mitigate the consequences of global warming, but will not address the causes of climate change (for example, greenhouse gas emissions caused by humans) 2017-04-23 17:55 GMT+02:00 Andrew Lockley <[email protected]>: > https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10584-017-1970-8 > > Beliefs and values explain international differences in perception of > solar radiation management: insights from a cross-country survey > > - Authors > <https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10584-017-1970-8#authors> > - Authors and affiliations > > <https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10584-017-1970-8#authorsandaffiliations> > - > > > - Vivianne H. M. VisschersEmail author <[email protected]> > - Jing Shi > - Michael Siegrist > - Joseph Arvai > > > - > - > <[email protected]> > - > - > - > - > - > - > - > > > 1. 1. > 2. 2. > 3. 3. > 4. 4. > > Article > First Online: 22 April 2017 > <https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10584-017-1970-8#article-dates-history> > > DOI: 10.1007/s10584-017-1970-8 > Cite this article as:Visschers, V.H.M., Shi, J., Siegrist, M. et al. > Climatic Change (2017). doi:10.1007/s10584-017-1970-8 > > - 2Downloads > > Abstract > > Solar radiation management (SRM) aims to counteract the negative > consequences of global warming and is considered for deployment in the > event that mitigation and adaptation efforts appear insufficient. However, > because the potential ecological and political side effects of SRM are not > well understood, and because SRM will cross national boundaries, an > international research perspective on the general public’s perception of > this technology is required. We conducted an online survey on the general > public’s perception and acceptance of SRM in Canada, China, Germany, > Switzerland, the UK, and the USA. Our findings confirmed the need for an > international perspective, as we found several cross-country differences. > Chinese respondents, for example, indicated greater acceptance for SRM than > their North American and European counterparts. Moreover, results of > regression analyses on acceptance of SRM by country revealed that lower > acceptability ratings for SRM in Canada and Europe were mostly related to > stronger beliefs that SRM tampers with nature. Chinese respondents, by > contrast, were more accepting of SRM when they held stronger beliefs that > it may reduce the motivation to adopt burdensome climate change mitigation > efforts. Although our research—and previous studies—suggest that opposition > to SRM remains, dismissing the technology entirely on these grounds and > without conducting a careful, cross-national, and transdisciplinary > decision-support process to set up an international policy regime seems > premature as people from countries that are less prepared to mitigate and > adapt to climate change seem to be more supportive of SRM. > KeywordsSolar radiation management Public perception Cross-country survey > Tampering > with nature Moral hazard Human values > Electronic supplementary > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "geoengineering" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "geoengineering" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
