Solar Radiation Management as a Measure of Last Resort: Biophysical and Political Dimensions in Geoengineering

1. Geoengineering: A Theoretical Global Concept

By January 2026, the theoretical debates that once characterized climate discourse have been violently superseded by biophysical reality. The early weeks of the year have presented humanity not with a warning, but with a verdict. The Earth system is no longer merely warming; it is fracturing in nonlinear, unpredictable ways that defy the smooth curves of early century climate models. We stand at a juncture where the "unthinkable" solutions of the past—specifically the intentional modification of the planetary albedo, or solar geoengineering—are migrating from the fringes of science fiction into the halls of desperate legislative assemblies and the war rooms of national security councils.

The impetus for this shift is not merely the accumulation of carbon dioxide, but the sudden, catastrophic unraveling of regional ecosystems that were previously thought to be stable on centennial timescales. The discourse has moved beyond the polite "moral hazard" arguments of the 2010s—which posited that researching geoengineering would distract from emissions cuts—into a brutal calculus of survival. As the Guardian commentator "Atlant" presciently noted in early January 2026, the deteriorating situation makes it a near certainty that geoengineering will be attempted.¹ The terrifying asymmetry of the technology—where a "rogue" actor with a few hundred billion dollars can bypass the consensus of the international community—has transformed the climate emergency from a tragedy of the commons into a potential tyranny of the unilateral.¹

This report offers an exhaustive analysis of this precarious moment. It dissects the converging crises of the cryosphere and biosphere that are driving the demand for intervention. It elucidates the complex microphysics and engineering challenges that stand between the theory of cooling and its safe execution. Finally, it lays bare the cavernous governance void—a "Wild West" of legislative paralysis, diplomatic failure, and reactionary populism—that currently manages the most consequential technology ever conceived by our species.

1.1 The Breakdown of Natural Baselines

To understand why solar radiation modification (SRM) is being seriously considered, one must appreciate the scale of the failures in natural systems that occurred in late 2025 and early 2026. Two events, separated by vast geography but linked by the physics of heat, serve as the primary signals of this new regime: the hydrological collapse of Lake Rouge in Quebec and the biological annihilation of chiropteran populations in Australia.

These events are not merely disasters; they are "state shifts." They represent the crossing of thresholds where the system does not return to its previous equilibrium. In Quebec, the landscape physically broke; in Australia, the biological machinery of life thermally seized. These are the "hard limits" of adaptation, the points at which resilience is exhausted and collapse becomes instantaneous. It is against this backdrop of irreversible loss that the transparency of geoengineering research has become the paramount issue of our time.²

2. Signals from the Brink: The Biophysical Drivers of Intervention

The argument for geoengineering is often framed as abstract insurance. However, in 2026, the argument is being written in the mud of drained lakes and the silent canopies of eucalyptus forests. These case studies provide the empirical foundation for the urgency gripping the scientific community.

2.1 The Cryospheric Collapse: The Disappearance of Lake Rouge

In the boreal expanse of Quebec, a geological permanence vanished in a geological blink. Lake Rouge, a substantial body of water that had existed since the retreat of the Laurentide Ice Sheet, disappeared over the course of a few weeks in the spring of 2025.³ This event, confirmed by NASA Earth Observatory data and local Cree testimony, challenges our fundamental assumptions about the stability of northern hydrology in a warming world.⁵

2.1.1 The Mechanism of Failure

The disappearance was not an act of evaporation but of structural failure. The investigation reveals a "cascading failure" mode typical of complex systems under stress. The preconditions were laid by the intense wildfire seasons of 2019 and 2023.⁶ These fires did more than burn trees; they degraded the organic soil horizons that insulate the underlying permafrost and maintain soil cohesion. The heat from the fires, combined with subsequent logging and soil scarification, compromised the structural integrity of the lake's basin.³

The trigger was the spring thaw of 2025. A rapid melt of regional snow cover created a massive pulse of hydrostatic pressure. In a stable climate, the frozen ground would have acted as an impermeable barrier. However, the degradation of the permafrost—likely creating "thermokarst" features or subsurface voids—allowed the pressurized water to fracture the basin.⁵ The lake drained violently into the adjacent Lake Doda watershed, carrying with it a slurry of sediment and debris.⁴

2.1.2 Ecological and Social Fallout

The consequences extend far beyond the loss of a landmark. The influx of sediment into Lake Doda has created a turbidity spike that threatens the benthic (bottom-dwelling) ecosystem, particularly the sturgeon populations that rely on clean gravel beds for spawning.⁴ For the local Cree community, this is a cultural and subsistence catastrophe. The draining of the lake and the subsequent land collapse have rendered traditional traplines dangerous and altered the migratory patterns of moose, a staple food source.³

This event illustrates the "nonlinear" nature of climate risk. There was no linear decline in the lake level that allowed for adaptation. There was a binary switch: lake, then no lake. Proponents of geoengineering point to Lake Rouge as evidence that we have already destabilized the planet's thermostat. They argue that we are already geoengineering the planet unintentionally through greenhouse gases and land use, with chaotic results.² Intentional intervention, they suggest, could hardly be worse than the accidental destruction of entire watersheds.

2.2 Biological Limits: The Australian Heatwave and Mass Mortality

While the Northern Hemisphere watched its water vanish, the Southern Hemisphere watched its wildlife burn. In January 2026, a heatwave of "biblical" proportions struck southeastern Australia, encompassing Victoria, South Australia, and New South Wales.⁸ The temperatures, soaring past 42 degrees Celsius (107 degrees Fahrenheit), collided with the physiological limits of the Grey-headed flying fox (Pteropus poliocephalus), a species already listed as vulnerable.⁸

2.2.1 The Physiology of Hyperthermia

Mammalian biology operates within a narrow thermal window. For the flying fox, the upper critical temperature is approximately 40 degrees Celsius. Below this, the bats can thermoregulate by fanning their wings and seeking shade. Once the ambient temperature exceeds 42 degrees Celsius, these behavioral adaptations fail.⁸ The animals suffer from acute hyperthermia: their proteins begin to denature, organ systems shut down, and they lose the ability to cling to their roosts.

The result was a "rain" of dead bats. Volunteers at locations like Melbourne's Brimbank Park described "carpets of death" beneath the trees.⁸ The scale of the die-off is estimated to be in the thousands, potentially rivaling the devastating "Black Summer" fires of 2019-2020 in terms of ecological impact.⁸

2.2.2 Keystone Consequences

This is not merely an animal welfare tragedy; it is an ecological decapitation. Flying foxes are "keystone pollinators" for the eucalyptus forests of Australia.⁸ They are the primary vectors for seed dispersal and pollination for many hardwood species. Their mass death threatens the reproductive viability of the forest itself, creating a negative feedback loop: fewer bats mean fewer healthy trees, which means less carbon sequestration and more warming.⁸

The relevance to geoengineering is direct. Mitigation (cutting emissions) acts on a timescale of decades. The carbon emitted today will continue to warm the planet for centuries. Mitigation cannot prevent the heatwave of next Tuesday. Only Solar Radiation Modification, with its ability to rapidly reduce peak temperatures (peak shaving), could theoretically have kept the thermometer below the fatal 42-degree threshold.¹¹ This utilitarian calculus—trading the risks of aerosols for the survival of species—is becoming increasingly difficult to dismiss.

3. The Mechanics of the Shield: The Physics of Solar Radiation Modification

If the breakdown of nature provides the "why" for geoengineering, physics provides the "how." However, the popular conception of geoengineering as a simple "thermostat" is deeply misleading. The actual science involves complex microphysics, non-intuitive optical behaviors, and formidable engineering challenges. We must dissect the two primary proposed methods: Stratospheric Aerosol Injection (SAI) and Marine Cloud Brightening (MCB).

3.1 Stratospheric Aerosol Injection (SAI): The Global Veil

SAI is the most studied and potentially the most powerful form of intervention. It aims to replicate the cooling effect of large volcanic eruptions, like that of Mount Pinatubo in 1991, which cooled the Earth by roughly 0.5 degrees Celsius for over a year.¹² The core concept is to inject reflective particles into the stratosphere, a stable layer of the atmosphere situated between 10 and 50 kilometers above the surface.¹³

3.1.1 The Chemistry of Reflection: Sulfur vs. Calcite

Historically, sulfate aerosols (derived from sulfur dioxide, SO2) have been the particle of choice due to their natural precedent. When injected into the stratosphere, SO2 gas oxidizes to form sulfuric acid vapor, which then condenses with water vapor to create liquid droplets.¹⁴ These droplets scatter incoming sunlight back into space.

However, sulfate aerosols come with a "devil's tax." They absorb outgoing longwave (infrared) radiation from the Earth, causing the lower stratosphere to heat up.¹⁵ This heating can alter the dynamics of the jet streams and the Brewer-Dobson circulation, potentially shifting weather patterns and precipitation globally.¹³ Furthermore, sulfate aerosols provide a surface for heterogeneous chemical reactions that liberate chlorine, catalyzing the destruction of the ozone layer.¹⁴

In response to these dangers, research in 2025 has pivoted toward solid particles, specifically calcite (calcium carbonate, CaCO3). Calcite is effectively "anti-acid." It has a high refractive index for scattering sunlight but absorbs very little infrared radiation, theoretically minimizing stratospheric heating.¹⁵ More importantly, because it is alkaline, it could react with and neutralize stratospheric acids (like nitric and sulfuric acid), potentially increasing the ozone column rather than depleting it.¹⁵ This "win-win" scenario remains theoretical and relies on the successful engineering of non-clumping dry powders.

3.1.2 The Mie Scattering Efficiency Trap

The physics of how these particles reflect light is governed by Mie scattering theory. This theory dictates that for a particle to efficiently scatter light, its size must be roughly comparable to the wavelength of the light it is scattering.¹⁹ For sunlight, which peaks in the visible spectrum (roughly 500 nanometers), the ideal particle radius is a few hundred nanometers.¹⁹

If particles are too small (the Rayleigh scattering regime), they are largely transparent to sunlight. If they are too large, their scattering efficiency per unit of mass drops (they become "expensive" in terms of payload), and they fall out of the sky too quickly due to gravity.²¹

3.1.3 The Smoluchowski Barrier: Coagulation

Here lies the fundamental physical limit of SAI, often ignored in high-level policy discussions: coagulation. The stratosphere is not a static warehouse; it is a dynamic fluid. As we inject more material to achieve more cooling, the concentration of particles increases. According to the Smoluchowski coagulation equation, the rate at which particles collide and stick together increases with the square of their concentration.²²

In the rarefied air of the stratosphere, Van der Waals forces ensure that when particles collide, they stick. As they clump together into larger aggregates, they become less efficient at scattering light and fall out of the sky faster.²¹ This creates a law of diminishing returns. You cannot simply double the injection rate to get double the cooling. Beyond a certain threshold, adding more sulfur effectively just creates larger, shorter-lived particles that heat the stratosphere without cooling the surface efficiently.²¹ This physical "ceiling" suggests that SAI may not be able to offset extreme warming scenarios without massive, unsustainable injection rates.

3.2 Marine Cloud Brightening (MCB): The Regional Shield

Unlike the global nature of SAI, Marine Cloud Brightening acts on the troposphere, specifically on the marine stratocumulus cloud decks that cover vast areas of the ocean.²⁴

3.2.1 The Twomey Effect Explained

MCB relies on the Twomey effect, also known as the cloud albedo effect. Clouds are made of water droplets, and each droplet requires a microscopic particle (a Cloud Condensation Nucleus, or CCN) to form. In the pristine air over the remote ocean, CCN are scarce, leading to clouds with relatively few, large droplets.²⁵

If we inject billions of tiny sea salt crystals into these clouds, we artificially increase the CCN population. For the same amount of liquid water, the cloud is forced to distribute that water over many more nuclei, resulting in billions of tiny droplets instead of millions of large ones.¹⁹ Smaller droplets have a higher total surface area, which makes the cloud more opaque and reflective—whiter.¹⁹

3.2.2 The Engineering of the Perfect Spray

The challenge is generating the salt particles. They must be essentially monodisperse (uniform in size), ideally between 30 and 100 nanometers in diameter.²⁴ If the particles are too small, they won't activate as cloud droplets. If they are too large (micron-scale), they act as "Giant CCN." Giant CCN accumulate water so rapidly that they grow into drizzle drops, causing the cloud to rain out and dissipate—the exact opposite of the intended effect.²⁸

Recent breakthroughs in 2025 have focused on "flow pulsation" technologies for spray nozzles. By pulsing the pressure of the seawater jet at high frequencies, engineers can control the breakup of the fluid stream (the Rayleigh-Plateau instability), creating a narrow distribution of droplet sizes and avoiding the creation of "cloud-killing" giant particles.²⁹

3.3 Glacial Interventions: The Emergency Brake

A third, more localized category of geoengineering targets the cryosphere directly. The collapse of the Thwaites and Pine Island glaciers in West Antarctica is driven by the intrusion of warm Circumpolar Deep Water onto the continental shelf.³⁰

Proposed solutions include "seabed curtains"—flexible, buoyant barriers anchored to the seafloor to physically block this warm water.³⁰ Another approach involves "thermosiphons," passive heat-exchange pipes similar to those used on the Trans-Alaska Pipeline. These would be inserted through the ice shelf to freeze the basal ice to the bedrock, increasing friction and slowing the glacier's slide into the sea.³¹ These interventions are massive civil engineering projects in the most hostile environment on Earth, but they avoid the global atmospheric risks of SAI.

4. The Governance Vacuum: A Crisis of Legitimacy

While the physics of geoengineering is governed by the immutable laws of thermodynamics, its deployment is governed by the chaotic laws of international politics. As of 2026, the governance landscape is a vacuum, characterized by the failure of multilateral institutions and the rise of unilateral mistrust.

4.1 The Diplomatic Failure at UNEA-6

The collapse of the Sixth UN Environment Assembly (UNEA-6) in early 2024 was a pivotal moment. A resolution proposed by Switzerland, which merely sought to establish an expert group to gather information on SRM, was withdrawn after failing to reach consensus.³³

The opposition was led by the African Group of Nations, supported by countries like Mexico and Colombia.³⁵ Their resistance is rooted in a profound historical skepticism: why should the Global South trust a technology that will likely be controlled by the same powers that caused the climate crisis? They argued for a "non-use" agreement, fearing that even researching SRM acts as a "slippery slope" toward deployment.³⁵ This diplomatic stalemate has left the world with no formal international mechanism to regulate, monitor, or authorize geoengineering research.³⁷

4.2 The "Free Driver" Problem and Rogue Actors

The lack of a treaty creates a dangerous strategic environment. Unlike emissions reduction, which suffers from a "free rider" problem (everyone wants the benefits of a stable climate without paying the cost), geoengineering is a "free driver" problem. It is so cheap—estimated at a few billion dollars per year—that a single medium-sized economy (or "minilateral" coalition) could deploy it unilaterally.¹

If a nation like India faces a heatwave that threatens to kill millions, they may feel morally compelled to deploy SAI. Without a global governance framework, such an action could be interpreted as an act of weather warfare by neighbors. Does a cooling effect in Delhi cause a drought in Islamabad? The lack of transparency means that any weather anomaly following a unilateral deployment will be blamed on the geoengineers, potentially sparking conflict.³⁸

4.3 Domestic Polarization: The US "Atmospheric Study Act"

In the United States, the debate has been subsumed by the culture wars. In January 2026, Rep. Eli Crane introduced the "Atmospheric Study Act" (H.R. 6941).⁴⁰ This bill is a case study in motivated reasoning: it mandates the Department of Energy to study only the negative impacts and health risks of geoengineering, explicitly ignoring any potential benefits.⁴⁰

This legislation reflects a "horseshoe" coalition. On the right, populists view geoengineering as a violation of sovereignty and a validation of "chemtrail" conspiracies.⁴² On the left, environmentalists view it as a corporate "out" for the fossil fuel industry.⁴³ The text of similar state-level bills, such as the one in Kentucky, uses inflammatory language about "atmospheric polluting interventions" and "unconstitutional actions," effectively criminalizing the scientific nuance needed to evaluate the technology.⁴⁴

5. The Transparency Imperative: Breaking the Deadlock

The current trajectory—accelerating biophysical collapse met with governance paralysis—is unsustainable. The only path forward that avoids both "termination shock" (the rapid warming that occurs if geoengineering stops suddenly) and geopolitical conflict is a radical commitment to transparency.

5.1 The Proposal for a Global Registry

The World Meteorological Organization (WMO) and other scientific bodies have proposed the creation of a global registry for all geoengineering research.⁴⁵ This would require:

1. Mandatory Pre-notification: No outdoor experiment, no matter how small, can proceed without being registered in a public database.

2. Open Data Access: All data collected must be public. There can be no proprietary or classified climate data in a geoengineered world.⁴⁷

3. Independent Assessment: Impacts must be evaluated by bodies independent of the funders and researchers.⁴⁷

5.2 Justice and the Global South

Transparency alone is not enough; there must be equity in capacity. The "Degrees Initiative" has been instrumental in funding research led by scientists in the Global South.⁴⁸ It is critical that the evaluation of SRM is not a monologue from the Global North. Scientists in Brazil, India, and South Africa must have the resources to run their own models and determine how these interventions would affect their own regional climates (e.g., the Amazon basin or the Monsoon).¹

5.3 Confronting the "Termination Shock"

Finally, governance must address the long game. If we start SAI, we are grasping a "tiger by the tail." If the system is stopped—due to terrorism, war, or economic collapse—the aerosols would settle out in 1-2 years, and the suppressed warming would rebound with catastrophic speed.⁵⁰ This "termination shock" would be far more damaging than the gradual warming it masked. Therefore, any governance framework must arguably treat the maintenance of the system as a critical global infrastructure, immune to political cycles or conflict—a staggeringly high bar for human cooperation.⁵²

6. Conclusion: The Unavoidable Conversation

The disappearance of Lake Rouge and the mass death of Australia's flying foxes are not merely tragedies; they are ultimatums. They signal that the Earth's systems are moving faster than our diplomatic cycles. We are entering an era where the choice is no longer between "natural" and "engineered," but between "unintentionally broken" and "intentionally managed."

The danger is that without a robust, transparent governance framework, this management will be undertaken by the desperate or the rogue, in the shadows, without consent. The "Atmospheric Study Act" and the silence of the UN are failures of nerve. We need a science that is humble enough to admit the risks of the "Smoluchowski barrier" and a politics brave enough to build the "WMO registry." The alternative is a world where the sky itself becomes a theater of war.

Table 1: Comparative Analysis of Solar Radiation Modification Technologies (2026 Status)

Feature	Stratospheric Aerosol Injection (SAI)	Marine Cloud Brightening (MCB)	Glacial Anchoring (Seabed Curtains)
Primary Mechanism	Backscattering of sunlight via stratospheric aerosols	Increasing cloud albedo via Twomey effect (CCN injection)	Physical blocking of warm ocean currents
Target Altitude/Location	20–25 km (Stratosphere)	< 1 km (Marine Boundary Layer)	Seabed / Ice Shelf Cavity (Antarctica)
Material Agent	Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) or Calcite (CaCO3)	Seawater (Sodium Chloride crystals)	Geotextiles / Thermosiphons
Key Physical Constraint	Coagulation Efficiency (Smoluchowski limit); Sedimentation	Aerosol Size Distribution; Updraft velocity limits	Fluid Dynamics of tidal currents; Iceberg scouring
Global Cooling Potential	High (Global ~1-2°C feasible)	Moderate (Regional/Oceanic focus)	Low (Local cryosphere preservation)
Primary Side Effects	Ozone depletion; Sky whitening; Precipitation shifts	Circulation changes; Potential rainfall suppression	Benthic ecosystem disruption; High cost
Termination Risk	Extreme (Global rapid warming shock)	Moderate (Rapid but regional rebound)	Low (Structural failure, not climatic)
Governance Status	Highly controversial; effectively banned in some nations	Ambiguous; small trials conducting	Permitted as "conservation" research

Table 2: The Timeline of Escalation (2024-2026)

Date	Event	Significance for Geoengineering
Feb 2024	UNEA-6 (Nairobi)	Diplomatic Failure: Switzerland withdraws SRM resolution due to lack of consensus. The "Non-Use" bloc (African Group) asserts dominance, leaving a governance vacuum.
Spring 2025	Lake Rouge Drainage	Biophysical Tipping Point: Collapse of public trust in "natural stability." Validates fears of nonlinear Arctic change.
Jan 2026	"Atmospheric Study Act" (US)	Political Polarization: Introduction of partisan legislation (H.R. 6941) mandating biased study of only negative effects.
Jan 2026	Australian Heatwave	Biological Limit: Mass mortality of Flying Foxes at >42°C. Demonstrates the "hard limits" of adaptation and the need for peak-shaving cooling.
Jan 8, 2026	Guardian Commentary	Public Sentiment: High-profile warning that "rogue" actors will inevitably deploy cheap geoengineering technologies.

This report synthesizes the state of play in January 2026. The science is racing to solve the riddles of coagulation and nozzle dynamics, while the politics retreats into nationalism and denial. The gap between these two velocities is where the danger lies.

Works cited

1. If geoengineering is ever deployed in a climate emergency ..., accessed January 12, 2026, https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2026/jan/08/geoengineering-climate-emergency-transparency

2. US Climate Experts Urge Reappraisal of Geoengineering Research Amidst Accelerating Global Warming, accessed January 12, 2026, https://world.infonasional.com/us-climate-experts-urge-reappraisal-of-geoengineering-research-amidst-accelerating-global-warming

3. Quebec's Lake Rouge vanished – but was it a freak natural event or caused by human actions? | Canada | The Guardian, accessed January 12, 2026, https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/jan/10/quebecs-lake-rouge-vanished-but-was-it-a-freak-natural-event-or-caused-by-human-actions

4. Big lake in Quebec suddenly disappears, satellite finds | Space photo of the day for August 1, 2025, accessed January 12, 2026, https://www.space.com/astronomy/earth/big-lake-in-quebec-suddenly-disappears-satellite-finds-space-photo-of-the-day-for-august-1-2025

5. The Disappearance of Lac Rouge - NASA Science, accessed January 12, 2026, https://science.nasa.gov/earth/earth-observatory/the-disappearance-of-lac-rouge-154526/

6. Quebec's Lac Rouge completely drained when no one was looking : r/geography - Reddit, accessed January 12, 2026, https://www.reddit.com/r/geography/comments/1lzn1cd/quebecs_lac_rouge_completely_drained_when_no_one/

7. 'Complete drainage' of lake cuts off Cree hunting territory near Waswanipi, Que. | CBC News, accessed January 12, 2026, https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/north/lake-drainage-land-collapse-waswanipi-lake-rouge-lake-doda-1.7539994

8. Heatwave Horror: Thousands of Flying Foxes Drop Dead in "Biblical" Die-Off - Streamline, accessed January 12, 2026, https://streamlinefeed.co.ke/news/heatwave-horror-thousands-of-flying-foxes-drop-dead-in-biblical-die-off

9. Heat wave kills thousands of flying foxes in southeastern Australia and causes the largest mass mortality since the Black Summer. - Click Oil and Gas, accessed January 12, 2026, https://en.clickpetroleoegas.com.br/Heat-wave-kills-thousands-of-flying-foxes-in-southeastern-Australia-and-causes-the-highest-mass-mortality-rate-since-the-Black-Summer-%28nmb91%29./

10. Flying foxes die in their thousands in worst mass-mortality event since Australia's black summer - The Guardian, accessed January 12, 2026, https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2026/jan/12/flying-foxes-die-in-their-thousands-in-worst-mass-mortality-event-since-australias-black-summer

11. Bipartisan Backlash Against Geoengineering and Carbon Removal in the United States, accessed January 12, 2026, https://carnegieendowment.org/research/2025/10/united-states-geoengineering-carbon-removal-bipartisan-backlash?lang=en

12. Solar radiation modification - Wikipedia, accessed January 12, 2026, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_radiation_modification

13. 2023 News & Events: For Stratospheric Aerosol Injection, All Strategies are Not Created Equal, accessed January 12, 2026, https://csl.noaa.gov/news/2023/390_1107.html

14. The potential environmental and climate impacts of stratospheric aerosol injection: a review, accessed January 12, 2026, https://pubs.rsc.org/en/content/articlehtml/2024/ea/d3ea00134b

15. Stratospheric solar geoengineering without ozone loss - PMC - NIH, accessed January 12, 2026, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5206531/

16. Stratospheric ozone response to sulfate aerosol and solar dimming climate interventions based on the G6 Geoengineering Model Intercomparison Project (GeoMIP) simulations - ACP, accessed January 12, 2026, https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/22/4557/2022/

17. Why does stratospheric aerosol forcing strongly cool the warm pool? - ACP, accessed January 12, 2026, https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/24/7203/2024/

18. An overview of geoengineering of climate using stratospheric sulphate aerosols, accessed January 12, 2026, https://royalsocietypublishing.org/rsta/article/366/1882/4007/17403/An-overview-of-geoengineering-of-climate-using

19. ICP: Aerosols in the Atmosphere - NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies, accessed January 12, 2026, https://www.giss.nasa.gov/edu/icp/research/ppa/1997/reyes/

20. Scattering and absorption of light by aerosol particles - PoS - Proceeding of science, accessed January 12, 2026, https://pos.sissa.it/427/159/pdf

21. A fully coupled solid-particle microphysics scheme for stratospheric aerosol injections within the aerosol–chemistry–climate model SOCOL-AERv2 - GMD, accessed January 12, 2026, https://gmd.copernicus.org/articles/17/7767/2024/

22. Evaluating the Efficiency of Enhanced Coagulation for Nanoplastics Removal Using Flow Cytometry - PMC - NIH, accessed January 12, 2026, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12261319/

23. The effectiveness of the coagulation sink of 3–10 nm atmospheric particles - ACP, accessed January 12, 2026, https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/22/11529/2022/

24. Marine cloud brightening - PMC - PubMed Central, accessed January 12, 2026, https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3405666/

25. Sea spray aerosol makes up a small fraction of marine cloud condensation nuclei - the NOAA Institutional Repository, accessed January 12, 2026, https://repository.library.noaa.gov/view/noaa/61835/noaa_61835_DS1.pdf

26. Southern Ocean latitudinal gradients of cloud condensation nuclei - ACP - Copernicus.org, accessed January 12, 2026, https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/21/12757/2021/

27. Global observations of aerosol indirect effects from marine liquid clouds - ACP, accessed January 12, 2026, https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/23/13125/2023/

28. Sensitivity of warm clouds to large particles in measured marine aerosol size distributions – a theoretical study - ACP, accessed January 12, 2026, https://acp.copernicus.org/articles/20/15297/2020/

29. Flow Pulsation for Marine Cloud Brightening Droplet Generation - Centre for Climate Repair, accessed January 12, 2026, https://www.climaterepair.cam.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2025-08/Flow%20pulsation%20-%204th%20year%20report%20by%20Elisabeth%20Franks.pdf

30. Feasibility of ice sheet conservation using seabed anchored curtains - Oxford Academic, accessed January 12, 2026, https://academic.oup.com/pnasnexus/article-pdf/2/3/pgad053/50969568/pgad053.pdf

31. Thermosiphons in Glacier Climate Interventions: A Roadmap for Evaluating their Feasibility and Early Results in Modeling Local Ice Flow, accessed January 12, 2026, https://agu.confex.com/agu/agu24/meetingapp.cgi/Paper/1558998

32. Can engineering save Antarctica's most vulnerable glacier? - Science News Explores, accessed January 12, 2026, https://www.snexplores.org/article/glacier-engineering-save-antarctica

33. Need for Global Ban on Solar Geoengineering - OceanCare, accessed January 12, 2026, https://www.oceancare.org/en/stories_and_news/solar-geoengineering/

34. Sixth session of the United Nations Environment Assembly (UNEA-6) - UNEP, accessed January 12, 2026, https://www.unep.org/environmentassembly/unea6

35. Solar Radiation Modification resolution withdrawn at UNEA-6 - Third World Network (TWN), accessed January 12, 2026, https://www.twn.my/title2/climate/info.service/2024/cc240302.htm

36. Signatories - Solar Geoengineering Non-Use Agreement, accessed January 12, 2026, https://www.solargeoeng.org/non-use-agreement/signatories/

37. BALANCING ACT Assessing Risks and Governance of Climate Intervention, accessed January 12, 2026, https://zerogeoengineering.com/2026/balancing-act-assessing-risks-and-governance-of-climate-intervention/

38. Solar Geoengineering Governance: A Fragmented Institutional Landscape Covering Multi-Dimensional Impacts | European Journal of Risk Regulation - Cambridge University Press & Assessment, accessed January 12, 2026, https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/european-journal-of-risk-regulation/article/solar-geoengineering-governance-a-fragmented-institutional-landscape-covering-multidimensional-impacts/C822429F56FA80D0ACDB5538075AB179

39. Geopolitical ecology of solar geoengineering: from a 'logic of multilateralism' to logics of militarization - University of Arizona Libraries, accessed January 12, 2026, https://journals.librarypublishing.arizona.edu/jpe/article/id/2230/

40. Republican bill would study negative effects of geoengineering - POLITICO Pro, accessed January 12, 2026, https://subscriber.politicopro.com/article/eenews/2026/01/09/republican-introduces-bill-to-study-only-negative-effects-of-geoengineering-eed-00717062

41. H.R.6941 - 119th Congress (2025-2026): To direct the Secretary of Energy to conduct a study to identify the effects of covered geoengineering projects on the health of humans and the environment, and for other purposes., accessed January 12, 2026, https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/house-bill/6941

42. Hearing Wrap Up: Subcommittee Demands Transparency of Government Weather and Climate Engineering, accessed January 12, 2026, https://oversight.house.gov/release/hearing-wrap-up-subcommittee-demands-transparency-of-government-weather-and-climate-engineering/

43. Geoengineering | The Guardian, accessed January 12, 2026, https://www.theguardian.com/environment/geoengineering

44. AN ACT relating to geoengineering. 1 WHEREAS, "geoengineering" means the intentional manipulation of the 2 environment, accessed January 12, 2026, https://apps.legislature.ky.gov/recorddocuments/bill/26RS/hb60/orig_bill.pdf

45. Reflecting Sunlight: Recommendations for Solar Geoengineering Research and Research Governance (2021) - The Center for Climate & Security, accessed January 12, 2026, https://climateandsecurity.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/25762.pdf

46. 2024 News & Events: Scientists propose guidelines for solar geoengineering research, accessed January 12, 2026, https://csl.noaa.gov/news/2024/412_0822.html

47. Oxford Geoengineering Programme - Oxford Martin School, accessed January 12, 2026, https://www.oxfordmartin.ox.ac.uk/geoengineering

48. Putting developing countries at the centre of the SRM conversation, accessed January 12, 2026, https://www.degrees.ngo/

49. Building capacity to govern emerging climate intervention technologies | Elementa: Science of the Anthropocene | University of California Press, accessed January 12, 2026, https://online.ucpress.edu/elementa/article/12/1/00124/202924/Building-capacity-to-govern-emerging-climate

50. A Fate Worse Than Warming? Stratospheric Aerosol Injection and Global Catastrophic Risk, accessed January 12, 2026, https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/climate/articles/10.3389/fclim.2021.720312/full

51. Injecting particles into the atmosphere could temporarily reduce global warming, accessed January 12, 2026, https://revistapesquisa.fapesp.br/en/injecting-particles-into-the-atmosphere-could-temporarily-reduce-global-warming/

52. Solar geoengineering: Risk of 'termination shock' overplayed, study says - Carbon Brief, accessed January 12, 2026, https://www.carbonbrief.org/solar-geoengineering-risk-termination-shock-overplayed-study/