The national security implications of solar geoengineering: an Australian perspective

ABSTRACT

Given current emissions trends an increase in global temperatures in excess of 2°C is highly likely in the coming century. In this context, it seems increasingly probable that states may consider solar geoengineering as a stop-gap climate response. Solar geoengineering refers to measures that aim to alleviate some measure of global warming by intentionally increasing the amount of the sun’s energy that is reflected into space. Currently the two most discussed solar geoengineering techniques involve either marine cloud brightening or dispersing aerosols in the stratosphere. These techniques could be relatively inexpensive, are within the technological capacities (after a brief period of development) of technologically-advanced countries, and could have an almost immediate impact on temperatures. Yet, while solar geoengineering might potentially be utilised to manage some climate-linked security threats, it itself would create new security challenges. Consequently, this paper explores potential international security implications for Australia if a regional state, or group of states, initiates a solar geoengineering program. We conclude that since solar geoengineering is unlikely to become a first-order international issue, disputation over solar geoengineering will likely reflect, or act as a proxy for, wider patterns of state interaction. However, scenarios in which China and the United States take different positions, or in which there are divisions among regional powers, such as Indonesia, Malaysia, India and Singapore would pose the greatest threat to Australia’s national security.

KEYWORDS:

• Solar geoengineering
• climate change
• global warming
• Australian national security
• Australian foreign policy

View correction statement:

Correction

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Notes on contributors

Dr. Adam Lockyer is a Senior Lecturer in Security Studies in the Department of Security Studies and Criminology at Macquarie University. Dr. Lockyer was the 2015 Fulbright Scholar in US-Australia Alliance Studies. His latest book is Australia’s Defence Strategy: Evaluating Alternatives for a Contested Asia, (Melbourne: Melbourne University Press, 2017).

Dr. Jonathan Symons is a Senior Lecturer in International Relations. Prior to joining Macquarie in July 2013 Jon was a Lecturer at La Trobe University Melbourne and before that an Assistant Professor at Lingnan University, Hong Kong. Jon's research interests include the politics and ethics of climate change, energy security and geo-engineering; theories of political and sociological legitimacy; processes of international norm change; sexuality and human rights; and international relations theory. His latest book is Ecomodernism: Technology, Politics and The Climate Crisis, (Medford, MA: Polity Press, 2019).

ORCID

Adam Lockyer http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8778-0454

Jonathan Symons http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0078-9614

Notes

1. The term ‘geoengineering’ is also sometimes used with reference to ‘carbon dioxide removal’ (CDR) strategies that aim to reduce the atmospheric concentration of CO₂. Since CDR addresses the underlying cause of climate change it has very different implications to solar geoengineering (see Reekie and Howard 2012; Blackstock and Long 2010; Reynolds 2019).

2. Space-based solar geoengineering, which would require construction of a reflector at the L1 Lagrange point where the gravitational pull of the earth and sun are equal, is also theoretically possible but currently seems prohibitively expensive (Reynolds 2019, 22). However, if the coming decades see a space race between China and the United States it is conceivable that a space-based intervention might become more economically and politically advantageous.

3. Note that the United States and Soviet Union experimented with weather control during the Cold War. History is littered with examples of the best laid military operations being foiled by weather (from the Spanish Armada sailing into an uncharacteristically destructive British storm through to Nazi Germany’s invading Russia only to be confronted by the coldest winter in the twentieth century). The possibility of being able to harness and control weather thus promised significant military benefits (See, Fleming 2010; McNeill and Unger 2010).

4. Indeed, Dibb (2006) and White (2008) argue that geography should be the main determinant of future defence planning. Procurement decisions made today (e.g. what submarine to buy) will determine how future policymakers can respond to geopolitical events well into the distant future. They argue that the only variable defence planners can make a responable prediction on 50 years in the future is geography.