Proactive and reactive geoengineering: Engineering the climate and the lithosphere
Oomen, Jeroen; Meiske, Martin
(2021) WIREs Climate Change, volume 12, issue 6, pp. 1 - 15
(Article)
Abstract
In recent years, the idea of geoengineering, understood as large-scale interventions in the planet's climate to counteract anthropogenic climate change, has steadily increased its visibility. Presented explicitly as an approach to climate change, geoengineering is positioned as a response, a reactive fix. Geoengineering, however, has a longer and broader history
... read more
than the current climate crisis. It has long been an umbrella term for large-scale projects in which various Earth sciences meet dreams about human ecosphere interventions, especially regarding lithosphere and climate and weather modifications. In this paper, we review the history of geoengineering, focusing specifically on climate geoengineering and lithosphere geoengineering. We draw attention to the difference between “proactive” (“high-modernist”), aimed at mastery over nature, and “reactive” forms of geoengineering, hoping to address anthropogenic environmental degradation technologically. Additionally, we trace historical (dis)continuities between the older, proactive, form of geoengineering and their recent reframing as a technological fix—specifically around the question to what extent nature's complex systems can be known and controlled. Finally, we argue for the need to further research the intersections and shared histories between various forms of geoengineering. This article is categorized under: Climate, History, Society, Culture > Ideas and Knowledge.
show less
Download/Full Text
Keywords: climate change, climate engineering, geoengineering, history of technology, science and technology studies, Global and Planetary Change, Geography, Planning and Development, Atmospheric Science
Note: Funding Information: This work was partially supported by EU Marie Sklodowska-Curie grant agreement No. 642935. Funding Information: This work was partially supported by EU Marie Sklodowska‐Curie grant agreement No. 642935. Funding Information: Initially, the vast majority of atmospheric manipulation research focused on weather control (Harper, 2017 ). In 1933, the USSR had already set up a large research institute on rainmaking in Leningrad. After WWII, the United States followed suit. In 1946, Vincent Schaeffer and Irving Langmuir discovered that supercooled clouds could be induced to rain using dry‐ice particles (Schaefer, 1946 ). The discovery sparked many cloud‐seeding programs. A particularly influential example was Project Stormfury in the 1960s. Successor to the National Hurricane Research Project (1955), Stormfury attempted to further scientific understanding of hurricane formation. This included forecasting hurricane trajectories and, if possible, altering those trajectories using cloud‐seeding. It also tied into the increasing interest in predictability. As part of the project Jules Charney and Arnt Eliassen, pioneering weather and climate modelers, developed a computer model of hurricanes to predict their behavior (Charney & Eliassen, 1964 ). There were many more projects. Some were large, such as Project Climax (1960–1970), aimed at increasing snowpack in Colorado, or Project Skywater (1960s), a federal weather modification research project. Many other research projects were small, regional, and commercial. Although there are obvious differences between these early weather modification projects and (contemporary) climate engineering technologies, most notably in the proposed scales (regional vs. global), weather and climate interventions were initially often grouped together (e.g., Fedorov, 1974 ; Fletcher, 1968 ; Hess, 1974 ). Both were understood as influencing atmospheric circulation, and large‐scale cloud‐seeding was occasionally suggested as a possible way to alter local climates. Influencing the “heat budget of the surface/atmosphere system” (Fletcher, 1968 , p. 14), large‐scale cloud‐seeding—but also other interventions such as enhancing arctic albedo or changing ocean surface temperature—was seen as one option for climate modification, albeit a highly uncertain one. The National Science Foundation funding program for “Weather modification” in the 1960s also included “some basic work on climatic change and possible climate control” (Fletcher, 1968 , p. 16). In the USSR too there was a sustained interest in climate modification, perhaps even more pronounced than in the United States (Fletcher, 1968 ; Keith, 2000 ; Oldfield, 2013 ). Publisher Copyright: © 2021 The Authors. WIREs Climate Change published by Wiley Periodicals LLC.
(Peer reviewed)
