Falling from Cloud Nine: A Faulty Solution for Climate Change

In 1990, physicist John Latham hiked the undulating hills of Wales with his young son. Gazing at the clouds, Latham’s son asked why the clouds were bright. Latham explained how clouds reflected the sun’s rays. This interaction planted the concept of “Marine Cloud brightening” (MCB) —a technique that sprays microscopic salt particles into sea clouds, making them brighter and more reflective—in the physicist’s mind. This technology enables clouds to reflect more of the sun’s rays, hence cooling the planet down and alleviating climate change. Three decades later, scientists in California performed the first outdoor test of MCB, representing a significant step forward in environmental science technology. However, the development of this practice brings polarizing debates surrounding its morality.

Firstly, changing the composition of clouds could affect their patterns, resulting in abnormal ocean circulation patterns and distribution of precipitation among other potential consequences. These repercussions would not affect every region equally. For example, many undeveloped and developing countries, oftentimes situated on low-lying plains or flat islands, bear the brunt of changing precipitation patterns yet leave the smallest environmental footprints. Simultaneously, these countries lack a “say” in the implementation of MCB, since their chances for development and funding are limited to private individuals and companies in wealthier, more technologically developed countries. Any solution that lets wealthier countries reap the benefits of counteracting climate change while causing other countries to suffer leads to unacceptable consequences. 

People’s common perception of MCB as a “solution”—a dangerous mentality to have—further illustrates the ethical problems MCB poses. The invention of innovative and brilliant geoengineering techniques like MCB provides remarkable hope amidst the urgency of our climate crisis, but it misguides many into underestimating the urgency of the climate crisis, placing all expectation of a “magic fix” onto scientists. However, MCB—at best—can only slow down the warming of our atmosphere. It cannot completely solve climate change, nor does it address other crucial environmental issues, like ocean acidification or increased natural disasters. Addressing the root of the climate crisis requires altering our lifestyles and consumption habits. Considering MCB as a “solution” is dangerous, and a turn to the latest geoengineering technology only offers a temporary refuge from the change we must inevitably face.

Establishing that geoengineering cannot be our solution to climate change also calls into question the true significance of employing MCB. Despite being potentially promising, MCB would merely delay when we must actually address our environmental footprint, allowing the climate crisis to snowball further and potentially blinding our generation in a false blanket of security until viable solutions to slow climate change are no longer possible. Moreover, we risk shirking the potentially negative consequences of MCB onto future generations: Scientists don’t actually know what impacts MCB could have on the environment, so if countries were to go forward with this technique, we would be doing so with the certainty that we’re impacting the environment, yet without the knowledge of what that impact means. We would be gambling on the effectiveness of a brand new technique, placing the potential consequences of MCB squarely on the shoulders of future generations. Our reality demands greater, longer-lasting action than implementing MCB.

This being said, not all ethical concerns about MCB are valid. Another common concern is that geoengineering practices like MCB would subject Earth to man’s control—and thus manipulation. While MCB would doubtlessly change our planet, humans have already been “geoengineering” the Earth for centuries, ushering in what scientists call the Athropocene, a period so profound in its impact on Earth that it denotes its own geological epoch. We burn fossils, flatten forests, construct cities, and leave disasters—causing floods, droughts, and fires to mark our tracks. Since the first traces of industrialism, the Earth has been at our mercy—and we’ve never been very merciful. In the past, this impact has always been negative, such as sky-high emissions and the destruction of entire ecosystems. Now, we shouldn’t shy away from our unquestionable impact on and responsibility for the planet. While the unbalanced ramifications deem it morally questionable to employ, MCB represents a step towards a future where we take advantage of our technological advancement to reverse our impact on Earth to the best of our ability.