The letter is riddled with errors in understanding, misrepresenting, and the critical need for research. Seems written by a scientifically illiterate.
Regarding Ref. (2) Some models of non-optimized release showed problems. Other optimized strategies have much better targeted benefit, and less problems. Research rather than willful ignorance is the way to improve SRM geoengineering to the point that a global governing body agrees it is a by far net gain to implement, or at some point critically needed to avoid a runaway climate. Physics doesn't care about political arguments. Politics can play a helpful role in solving climate change, but unless we give up most of our modern lifestyle, science is needed to transition to sustainability. Gilles de Brouwer On Tue, Feb 9, 2021 at 3:55 PM Andrew Lockley <[email protected]> wrote: > > > https://www.geoengineeringmonitor.org/2021/02/letter-to-the-swedish-government-on-planned-scopex-test-flight/ > > February 8, 2021 > > To: > Per Bolund, Minister for Environment and Climate, and Deputy Prime Minister > Ibrahim Baylan, Minister for Business, Industry and Innovation > Matilda Ernkrans, Minister for Higher Education and Research > > cc: > Stefan Gardefjord, President and CEO of Swedish Space Corporation > Monica Lingegård, Chairperson of the Board of Swedish Space Corporation > > Dear Minsters Bolund, Baylan and Ernkrans, > > We are writing to express serious concern regarding a planned test by the > Stratospheric Controlled Perturbation Experiment (SCoPEx) project towards > the development of geoengineering technology, to be conducted with the > direct involvement of the state-owned Swedish Space Corporation (SSC). > > In June 2021 SSC is planning to facilitate a Stratospheric Aerosol > Injection (SAI) related test out of SSCs facilities in Kiruna, Northern > Sweden. SAI is a form of solar geoengineering which, if developed and > deployed, would attempt to reduce the amount of sunlight reaching the > earth’s surface by injecting large volumes of sun-blocking particles into > the upper levels of the earth’s atmosphere. > > While the first stratospheric flight proposed for Kiruna intends to test > the balloon and gondola equipment, the stated purpose of the flight is to > prepare for the release of aerosols into the stratosphere later in the > year—a test SCoPEx hopes might be possible to conduct in Kiruna. This would > be the first known SAI related open air release of particles. > > Since the goal of the initial flight is to enable the subsequent release > of particles, the social and environmental impacts of this test cannot be > evaluated in isolation from the overall purpose of the SCoPEx project. The > balloon flight must be viewed as integral to the project’s intention of > conducting open-air testing and particle release. > > We appeal to the Swedish government to oppose the SSC’s involvement with > SCoPEx’s proposed tests, as they are fundamentally incompatible with the > precautionary principle, in breach of international norms, and inconsistent > with Sweden’s own climate policy framework1 as well as its reputation as an > international climate leader. > > SAI is a technology with the potential for extreme consequences, and > stands out as dangerous, unpredictable, and unmanageable. There is no > justification for testing and experimenting with technology that seems to > be too dangerous to ever be used. > > Even proponents of the technology acknowledge that, if implemented at the > scale necessary to have an impact on global temperatures, SAI and other > solar geoengineering technologies could set in motion inherently > unpredictable shocks to the climate system, which could alter hydrological > cycles, disrupt monsoon patterns and increase drought. Rather than > mitigating the risks of climate change, SAI would likely exacerbate and > compound the extreme weather and climate instability that global warming is > already causing. For example, computer modelling suggests that SAI could > disrupt the sources of food and water for 2 billion people in Asia and > Africa in unpredictable ways.2 > > Another, fundamental concern is that because SAI only temporarily masks > the warming effect of greenhouse gases by blocking sunlight, suddenly > stopping the injection of these sunlight-blocking particles would very > likely cause a sudden spike in temperatures. The threat of this kind of > ”termination shock” could lock the world into an irreversible nightmare > situation where stopping SAI may be worse than continuing, despite mounting > catastrophes. > > In view of the uncertainties and profound risks of geoengineering, and > with Swedish leadership, the UN Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) > introduced 2008-10 a de facto moratorium on geoengineering.3 The > Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change cautions strongly against any > reliance on SAI, and solar geoengineering technologies were not included in > any modeled pathway in the IPCC’s landmark Special Report on 1.5C. > > The real danger of SCoPEx’s plans for Kiruna lies not in the research > itself, but in the very real global ramifications of proceeding along a > slippery slope towards normalization and deployment. Several critics and > researchers point to the danger of assuming that a forceful technology such > as SAI could be kept on the shelf as a “plan B” without opening the door to > the potential that, once developed, powerful interests could move to > unilateral deployment, with significant implications for peace, security > and human rights around the world.4 > > The political risk involved in this test is hence the most pressing > concern. The idea of the possible future use of SAI is already serving as > an excuse for actors who directly benefit and profit from continued carbon > emissions to delay and evade action. Further development of SAI as a > possible “emergency technology” risks deflating the critical pressure > necessary to transition to zero-carbon societies in time, which could prove > detrimental for the world’s efforts to deal with the climate crisis. > > We also note that the decision-making process does not appear to include > any populations potentially affected by the technology in Sweden or > globally, neither do there seem to have been sincere processes to ensure > free prior and informed consent in accordance with the United Nations > Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP). > > If SCoPEx proceeds in Kiruna there could be serious consequences for > Sweden’s reputation as a climate leader. In the lead-up to the Stockholm > +50 conference in 2022, Sweden is in a unique position to show leadership > in pressing for the rapid transition to real zero-emission societies, 100% > renewable energy, and the global phase-out of fossil fuel production. > Having a state-owned corporation facilitate the advancement of solar > geoengineering derails such ambition and risks seriously tarnishing > Sweden’s international standing. > > Sweden has long championed human rights and climate policy. It is with > this in mind, that we respectfully urge the Swedish government to take a > strong and explicit stand against the SCoPEx test, and against SAI and > geoengineering technologies in general. Any action towards eventual > deployment of SAI risks distracting the world from urgently reducing > greenhouse gasses and advances a technology that has the potential to put > the atmosphere, environment and communities in Sweden and around the world > at even greater risk. > > Sincerely, > > Johanna Sandahl, President of SSNC, on behalf of > Greenpeace Sweden > Jordens Vänner / Friends of the Earth Sweden > Naturskyddsföreningen / Swedish Society for Nature Conservation (SSNC) > Action Group on Erosion, Technology and Concentration (ETC Group) > Biofuelwatch > Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL) > Climate Justice Alliance (CJA) > Friend of the Earth International > Heinrich Böll Foundation > Indigenous Environmental Network (IEN) > WhatNext? > > -- > 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 view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/geoengineering/CAJ3C-04KHR-bHwunXWgN1HcomtsPd%3DB%2BKtF4qsb4WtO6huBVNA%40mail.gmail.com > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/geoengineering/CAJ3C-04KHR-bHwunXWgN1HcomtsPd%3DB%2BKtF4qsb4WtO6huBVNA%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> > . > -- 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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/geoengineering/CAGQ2tErn3GwHyLr2Q4RD_FUG94o-_MM43X9V7hjg5JLHFO7%2BUg%40mail.gmail.com.
