Proposals have been made about the injection of sulfur dioxide into the atmosphere to help in fighting the rising warm air due to global warming. Recent studies have contradicted the fears that using solar geoengineering to help fight the harsh effects of climate change could dangerously alter that pattern of rainfall and storms in most part of the world.
Published in the peer-reviewed journal, Natural Climate Change, the study showed the analysis that finds that cooling the Earth enough to eliminate at least half of the warming rather than targeting the whole of it would generally not bring about more intense tropical cyclones. Some studies showed that such a radical plan could worsen the availability of potable water or bring about extreme weather conditions that could may human survival a challenge.
The recent development in such study showed otherwise. In fact, it said that only about 0.4% of the Earth might see the impact of climate change to worsen. Climate experts, however, expressed their concerns on the idea of cooling the Earth. They emphasized that keeping twice as much carbon dioxide in the atmosphere could put some regions of the Earth at greater risk. Its effects would have been worse than how industrialization destroyed the planet.
One scientist who has read the study published earlier this week said that the information gathered by the study was not enough to conclude that the use of geoengineering methods to help cool down the earth was going to bring significant positive results. The process of geoengineering involved the spraying of sulphur dioxide in the atmosphere as if mimicking the gas emitted by volcanoes that reflects the sun's heat. He also expressed his concerns about its safety.
Some climate advocates also expressed that banking on saving the world through this unproven technology could put the lives of humankind at greater risk. They suggested instead to deal with the problem on the ground by working on reducing the harsh effects of pollution from power plants and cars.
David Keith, co-author of the study and a Harvard professor, said that "people should not dismiss the idea of using geoengineering to save the world." he expressed that the project may come with risks, but he believes that continued research should be done before it is ruled out.
"I am not saying that it would be effective now or that we should do it now," he said. "But we should look at it with more certainty for the future."
Alan Robock, a geophysicist professor at Rutgers University in New Jersey, says that the study failed to examine the potential effects of doing the most radical of experiments so far: spraying aerosols into the atmosphere.
"This may not be the best solution at the moment, but if global warming continues and we don't do anything from our end, it shouldn't come as a surprise that everyone's life is at risk," he said. Would geoengineering make things better or could it only make global warming worse for the people on earth? The easiest way is to try it, but it comes with a great risk that people should be prepared for.
In truth, the answer to this question is another question -- how much of it do we actually know?
