So-called “solar geoengineering,” the controversial idea of ​​cooling the Earth by reflecting sunlight back into space, is of interest to Earth’s super-rich, including Bill GatesGeorge Soros and Facebook co-founder Dustin Moskowitz.

Calls to accelerate research into solar radiation management (SRM, commonly referred to as solar geoengineering), especially as the planet gets closer to exceeding its temperature limit 1.5 degrees Celsius – which was established in the Paris Agreement as a critical temperature milestone and threshold for addressing climate change.

In recent months, solar geoengineering has again become the subject of public debate, although it is strongly opposed by activists and environmental groups.

At the end of February, more than 60 researchers from reputable institutions published a letter urging more thorough study strategy and small field experiments, while the United Nations report says it’s time to start exploring whether SRM can contribute to tackling the climate crisis.

Earlier in October last year, the White House announced that it was advancing a five-year research project to evaluate how the sunlight that reaches Earth is changing.

However, hundreds of climatologists and experts are strongly opposed to the rising tide of research and potential development and application of solar geoengineering.

IN open letter of warning that the growing promotion of SRM technologies as a possible solution to the climate problem is worrying – with potentially unexpected and dangerous consequences.

What is solar geodynamics?

Solar geodynamics or SRM refers to a number of impressive technologies for cooling the Earth. Some of the methods used in this method, such as the release of sulfur dioxide into the atmosphere, are known to have harmful effects on the environment and human health.

However, some scientists, concerned that humanity will exceed its emissions targets, argue that stepping up SRM research is critical to reducing the risks of a potentially dangerous rise in Earth’s temperature.

On the contrary, other scientists argue that “we know little about the method and this entails new risks for ecosystems and people.”

Source: CNNBC.