Geoengineering is the intentional large scale manipulation of the environment. This process has been suggested as an effective way of reducing the effects of global warming and the contribution of greenhouse gas emissions. There are many benefits to geoengineering that help restore important environmental processes and help to slow down and even reverse climate change. Things such as counteracting ocean acidification, restoring marine ecosystems, and solar radiation management are all positive results of geoengineering. While marine geoengineering has the potential to be a largely impactful solution to the fight against climate change, it also poses risks to things such as marine ecosystems, various ethical concerns, and the question of long term impacts that warrant cautious consideration before it’s widespread implementation.
Geoengineering is used as an umbrella term for two other main categories of techniques aimed towards the deliberate alteration of the earth’s climate. The process of carbon dioxide removal is one of the first techniques. In order to extract carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, crushed rock is spread over land that will absorb the carbon dioxide from the air. Another removal method is producing machinery that will directly capture carbon dioxide directly from the atmosphere and bury it (American University). Though carbon dioxide removal is feasible it poses economic and political controversy and would be difficult to achieve due to things such as future emission that may challenge the process. The second well known method used in geoengineering is Solar Radiation Management. Solar geoengineering’s main goal is to cool the earth by reflecting sunlight back into space (USC – What is Solar Geoengineering, 2020). The main concern with both of these methods is conducting them safely while still being time efficient but, both of those factors cannot be addressed simultaneously. Using SRM has scientists split on what they support. Some say that it is a feasible option to quickly reverse global warming while others believe that it poses major environmental, social, and geopolitical risks. Geoengineering as a whole has many different techniques that could potentially be used in the aid of climate change. The challenge is picking the right one.
As seen in many articles such as The Harvard Solar Geoengineering Research Program, geoengineering has many benefits that will, in the long term, help our planet in its fight against climate change. The main goal in fighting climate change connects to the ultimate goal and long term effects that geoengineering provides. This includes reducing climate impacts like extreme temperature, intensity of tropical storms, and changes in water resources it’s availability. All methods of geoengineering aim to reduce and eventually stop ocean acidification which also plays a role in climate change (The Harvard Solar Geoengineering Research Program 2025). Finally, the process of geoengineering would pose a great benefit to the earth because of its many benefits combating ocean acidification, carbon emissions, and the use and implementation of solar radiation management.
Though geoengineering has many positive attributes that could be effective in the long term, it can also have some negative traits that may produce a counter effect to the process it is trying to reverse. The overall, broad definition of what geoengineering is supposed to be used for is the environment and climate. With the use of specific processes in geoengineering it would result in the destruction of our natural resources and environment as they are in the present. Geoengineering has the potential to cause devastating harm to biodiversity and would affect the overall food web. It would generate a chain reaction that would trickle down ecosystems destroying the oxygen resources and nutrient cycles. It could also affect the climate in the ecosystem by creating uneven cooling and the overall weakening of the ozone layer (The risks of geoengineering). Though geoengineering has good intentions, it poses a bigger threat to our planet then we may be bargaining for. If it means destroying natural resources and key environments then is it really worth it?
The process of geoengineering is not only a subject in the scientific community but is also something that has to be brought to the attention of the political community as well. Different political components such as laws relating to geoengineering and climate change would have to be made, voted on, and or passed to make some change with respect to geoengineering. An ethics council would also have to review the geoengineering methods to see if the techniques used would be ethical to the surrounding environment, population, and economy. Though states like California have put different acts into practice to help carbon emissions and money has but given for the research and expansion of geoengineering, it is still a subject that needs to be further researched and tested to gain full support of political figures in the U.S. (Pillsburylaw). In general, there are many factors that have to be considered before fully committing to the plan of geoengineering to ensure the safety of those both directly and indirectly associated with the process.
If it is concluded in the future that geoengineering may not be ethical or fully effective in the long term or any other problem arises, we would need to look for a different, alternate solution to help the fight against climate change. An alternative method that would help the removal of carbon from the atmosphere is to transform it into solid or liquid form. This process is called Carbon Sequestration. It is not considered as the same process as carbon dioxide removal but has similar aspects and a common goal. There are two main types of carbon Sequestration which are biologic and geologic. Biologic is a process that will take the carbon dioxide out of the air and store it in places where it is naturally found. Geologic carbon Sequestration is when the extracted CO2 is stored in porous rock deep underground. The carbon dioxide is compressed to a point where it enters its supercritical phase which is when it turns to liquid. Then, it is injected into the rock where it becomes trapped within the pores of said rock. (Doe explains…carbon sequestration | Department of Energy). Circular economy is another method that could be beneficial but, would need the support of the government and would require laws to be made to enforce the circular economy method (Sanguino et al., 2020). This method has the same philosophy as recycling and includes things such as the reuse of materials to minimize emissions but, this method also has other aspects to it that make it different to the basic idea of recycling. Sustainable consumption is the second part of a Circular Economy format. It requires that individuals and businesses consume less and find alternatives for things with high emissions and urges the use of products with lower environmental impacts. Other methods that are effective but harder to orchestrate internationally are methods such as nature based solutions which include wetland restoration, natural disaster prep, and creating urban green spaces.
In closing, It can be deduced that geoengineering is a strong contender as a solution to climate change but it may not be refined enough to be unproblematic. Geoengineering presents a potential, but risky, solution to mitigating climate change, its ethical complexities, environmental uncertainties, and political challenges make it a contentious option. Further research needs to be conducted to look at ethics not only towards animals and their ecosystems but also to humans and our resources. Ultimately, a more balanced and sustainable approach that prioritizes emission reductions, renewable energy transitions, and nature-based solutions, which offer safer, more equitable pathways toward strong and climate-stable future for our planet.
Annotated Bibliography
Zhang, Z., Moore, J. C., Huisingh, D., & Zhao, Y. (2015). Review of geoengineering approaches to mitigating climate change. Journal of Cleaner Production, 103, 898-907.
In this article, the author talks about how geoengineering is the large-scale manipulation of the Earth’s environment. The main idea of this article is the possibility of geoengineering being a solution for regulating greenhouse gas emissions. This paper reviews various geoengineering methods, categorizing them into land-based, ocean-based, atmosphere-based, and space-based schemes.
Schneider, S. H. (2008). Geoengineering: could we or should we make it work?. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, 366(1882), 3843-3862.
This article explores the history of geoengineering and the geoengineering schemes proposed over the past 50 years to modify large-scale environmental systems and control climate. The article also debates whether we should put in the effort to make geoengineering work. The author argues that certain methods could be more cost-effective than traditional mitigation strategies than carbon taxes and emission regulations. In conclusion this article shows geoengineering as a controversial and risky alternative to addressing climate change, with both potential benefits and significant unknowns.
Michaelson, J. (2010). Geoengineering and climate management: from marginality to inevitability. Tulsa L. Rev., 46, 221.
In this article the author talks about a law review written in 1998 talking about geoengineering. The author chooses to compare and contrast the differences and discoveries found about geoengineering between 1998-2011. The article emphasizes that the need for geoengineering arises from the political and economic barriers to reducing emissions, which continue to hinder effective climate action.
What is carbon removal?. American University. (n.d.-b). https://www.american.edu/sis/centers/carbon-removal/what-it-is.cfm#:~:text=Enhanced%20Mineralization%2D%20spreading%20crushed%20rocks,the%20atmosphere%20and%20bury%20it
What is solar geoengineering?. Union of Concerned Scientists. (n.d.-a). https://www.ucsusa.org/resources/what-solar-geoengineering
The Harvard Solar Geoengineering Research Program. The Salata Institute. (2025c, January 14). https://salatainstitute.harvard.edu/sgrp/#:~:text=For%20example%2C%20it%20could%20reduce,novel%20risks%20and%20significant%20uncertainty.
The risks of geoengineering. (n.d.-c). https://www.ciel.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/CIEL_briefing_The-Risks-of-Geoengineering_October2024.pdf
Pillsburylaw. (n.d.-c). https://www.pillsburylaw.com/a/web/149509/Geoengineering-Research-Under-U.S.-Law.pdf
Doe explains…carbon sequestration | Department of Energy. (n.d.). https://www.energy.gov/science/doe-explainscarbon-sequestration
Sanguino, R., Barroso, A., Fernández-Rodríguez, S., & Sánchez-Hernández, M. I. (2020, January 7). Current trends in economy, Sustainable Development, and energy: A circular economy view – environmental science and Pollution Research. SpringerLink. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11356-019-07074-x
