The main purpose of this ongoing blog will be to track planetary extreme, or record temperatures related to climate change. Any reports I see of ETs will be listed below the main topic of the day. I’ll refer to extreme or record temperatures as ETs (not extraterrestrials).😜
Main Topic: The Pitfalls of Geoengineering to Fix Our Climate
Dear Diary. We as human beings want to ease pain, whether it be through analgesics such as Tylenol to ease body aches or now with bioengineering to ease the pain transitioning to a green economy to fix our climate. Doctors would say that people are training wrong if when bodybuilding they need to use analgesics to ease body aches after workouts that are too rigorous. The long-term taking of analgesics can cause other problems such as kidney and/or liver damage. So too can geoengineering for the planet. Putting substances into the atmosphere to reflect sunlight might change weather pattern in detrimental ways, so it is best not to tamper with that climate system.
The obvious fix for our climate is not putting excess carbon into our atmosphere. Yet sone people stubbornly cling to geoengineering ideas as an out to save us, and I admit that eventually some may need to be added to a mix of late 21st century Hail Mary solutions given our track record to save our climate. These are a crutch that might prevent us from learning how to walk with the burning of fossil fuels.
For more on the latest geoengineering news, here is a new BBC article:
Protect Arctic from ‘dangerous’ climate engineering, scientists warn
Protect Arctic from ‘dangerous’ climate engineering, scientists warn
9/09/2025
Mark Poynting Climate and science reporter, BBC News
Getty Images
Plans to fight climate change by manipulating the Arctic and Antarctic environment are dangerous, unlikely to work and could distract from the need to ditch fossil fuels, dozens of polar scientists have warned.
These polar “geoengineering” techniques aim to cool the planet in unconventional ways, such as artificially thickening sea-ice or releasing tiny, reflective particles into the atmosphere.
They have gained attention as potential future tools to combat global warming, alongside cutting carbon emissions.
But more than 40 researchers say they could bring “severe environmental damage” and urged countries to simply focus on reaching net zero, the only established way to limit global warming.
Geoengineering – deliberately intervening in the Earth’s climate system to counter the impacts of global warming – is one of the most controversial areas of climate research.
Some types are widely accepted – removing planet-warming carbon dioxide from the atmosphere via planting trees or using machines, for example, are recognised parts of net zero efforts.
Net zero means balancing the amount of planet-warming “greenhouse” gases produced by human activities with the amount being actively removed from the atmosphere.
But some more radical geoengineering ideas, like reflecting sunlight “are dealing with the symptoms of climate change rather than the causes,” said lead author Martin Siegert, professor of geosciences at the University of Exeter.
For supporters, it is worth exploring techniques which could help rein in rapidly rising temperatures, which are already bringing severe impacts for people and ecosystems around the world.
But for opponents, the risks are simply too great – particularly for the fragile polar regions, about which much remains unknown.
The ‘insane’ plan to save the Arctic’s sea-ice
Conspiracy theories swirl about geo-engineering, but could it help save the planet?
UK experiments to reflect sunlight one step closer
The scientists behind the new assessment, published in the journal Frontiers in Science, reviewed the evidence for five of the most widely discussed polar geoengineering ideas.
All fail to meet basic criteria for their feasibility and potential environmental risks, they say.
One such suggestion is releasing tiny, reflective particles called aerosols high into the atmosphere to cool the planet.
This often attracts attention among online conspiracy theorists, who falsely claim that condensation trails in the sky – water vapour created from aircraft jet engines – is evidence of sinister large-scale geoengineering today.
But many scientists have more legitimate concerns, including disruption to weather patterns around the world.
With those potential knock-on effects, that also raises the question of who decides to use it – especially in the Arctic and Antarctic, where governance is not straightforward.
If a country were to deploy geoengineering against the wishes of others, it could “increase geopolitical tensions in polar regions”, according to Dr Valerie Masson-Delmotte, senior scientist at the Université Paris Saclay in France.
Another fear is that while some of the ideas may be theoretically possible, the enormous costs and time to scale-up mean they are extremely unlikely to make a difference, according to the review.
One idea BBC News recently looked at was a plan to pump seawater over the surface of Arctic sea-ice in winter to thicken it, giving the ice a better chance to survive the summer.
But to cover 10% of the Arctic could require about 10 million seawater pumps, one estimate suggests.
A more fundamental concern is that these types of projects could create the illusion of an alternative to cutting humanity’s emissions of planet-warming gases.
“If they are promoted… then they are a distraction because to some people they will be a solution to the climate crisis that doesn’t require decarbonising,” said Prof Siegert.
“Of course that would not be true and that’s why we think they can be potentially damaging.”
BBC
Jemma CoxOne suggestion to save Thwaites Glacier, one of the most vulnerable Antarctic glaciers, is to install a giant sea “curtain” to stop warm water melting it more quickly – but the new study says this would be extremely costly and unlikely to work
Even supporters of geoengineering research agree that it is, at best, a supplement to net zero, not a substitution.
“The need for emissions reductions comes first… almost anything we do is futile without it,” according to Dr Shaun Fitzgerald, director of the University of Cambridge’s Centre for Climate Repair, which has been involved in some of the projects highlighted.
The assessment raises “very valid concerns” about some of the ideas, but they need to be balanced against the risks from “the perilous state of the climate,” he argued.
Like many other supporters of geoengineering research, Dr Fitzgerald does not support deploying it on a large scale yet, and acknowledged that further investigation might indeed find that the ideas are “bonkers”.
But he argued that more research would allow society to make “more informed decisions” about whether they could help or hinder in the fight against climate change.
A UK government-backed agency recently announced nearly £60m of funding for such research, though the government says it has no plans to deploy them.
But the authors of the new assessment view these projects as so unrealistic that efforts would be better directed towards decarbonisation and polar research.
“There are some basic home truths that don’t need an awful lot of research to come to a conclusion that they’re not really viable,” argued Prof Siegert.
A UK government spokesperson said: “Our priority is to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from human activities and to adapt to the unavoidable impacts of climate change.”
A simple guide to climate change
Four ways climate change worsens extreme weather
What is net zero and is the UK on track to achieve it?
Sign up for our Future Earth newsletter to keep up with the latest climate and environment stories with the BBC’s Justin Rowlatt. Outside the UK? Sign up to our international newsletter here.
Here are more “ETs” recorded from around the planet the last couple of days, their consequences, and some extreme temperature outlooks, as well as any extreme precipitation reports:
Here is More Climate News from Sunday:
(As usual, this will be a fluid post in which more information gets added during the day as it crosses my radar, crediting all who have put it on-line. Items will be archived on this site for posterity. In most instances click on the pictures of each tweet to see each article. The most noteworthy items will be listed first.)