Why India must invest in solar radiation modification research

This is why a set of ideas under the banner of Solar Radiation Modification (SRM) might hold appeal. SRM refers to technologies that have the ability to cool the planet by reflecting a fraction of sunlight back into space. The closest analogy is the temporary cooling effect often observed after major volcanic eruptions. This is caused by volcanic eruptions pumping aerosols in the air. One possible method of using SRM as a climate action tool is to inject aerosols into the stratosphere.

To be clear, SRM is neither a substitute for cutting emissions nor a cure for climate change. It does not stop ocean acidification or address the underlying drivers of warming. But it can act as a temporary measure to reduce extreme heat and buy time while mitigation and adaptation catch up. As with all emerging technologies, it is not without risk. The scientific jury is out on any unintended effects on rainfall or weather ecosystems, especially in places like India where the livelihoods of tens of millions are linked to monsoon rains.

Research versus deployment: A concern raised by some is that research on SRM will inexorably lead to deployment—that once nations dip their toes in the waters of experimentation, political or commercial interests will create so much momentum that we will be pushed to use it, whether doing so is wise or not. What’s often also inferred is that this will then reduce our emphasis on what should be the North Star—reducing emissions.

This is a genuine concern. But there is a graver risk in avoiding research altogether. If the world reaches a point where SRM is actively considered, decisions will have to be made in conditions of crisis. Without transparent and policy-relevant science, governments would be forced to decide in the dark, relying on knowledge produced elsewhere and shaped by others’ interests.

The more responsible path is to conduct it with clear guard-rails: transparency in methods and data, an emphasis on public engagement and separation of the research portfolio from future considerations of deployment. Note that research does not commit the world to use SRM. It gives decision-makers evidence of the viability of such interventions so that informed calls can be taken in the future and governance arrangements made if need be.

India cannot sit out: Our agriculture, water systems and ecosystems are among the world’s most sensitive to changes in temperature and precipitation. SRM could, for example, alter the strength or timing of the monsoon in ways that could either cushion us against heat extremes or disrupt food production. Without India-specific research, we will not know which of these outcomes is more likely. We will also not know what possible SRM deployment strategies will mitigate these risks.

Other countries are moving forward. The UK recently launched a £50 million SRM research programme, the largest of its kind. If decisions on global governance are eventually debated at multilateral forums, will India bring credible science, expertise and a clear perspective to the table? This is not only about climate science. It is also about sovereignty and preparedness.

Amid today’s turbulent geopolitics, India must pay close heed to where the leadership of emerging technologies like SRM lies as well as the risks of not studying them adequately. We should not find ourselves dependent on imports of modern climate technology.

As the world’s most populous country and one of the most climate-vulnerable, India has the responsibility and right to shape the global SRM debate. We must invest in research through our scientific institutions even as we forge networks of scientists, policymakers and civil society leaders for that purpose.

A pragmatic approach: We helped create the International Solar Alliance, set ambitious renewable energy targets and have consistently balanced climate action with developmental priorities. India’s is a credible voice of leadership for the Global South. We can bring this pragmatism to SRM by insisting on transparent publicly-funded research plus decision-making frameworks with clear limits and off-ramps that can ensure nobody slides into premature deployment. We need an Indian voice at global forums informed by science that reflects our realities and interests.

SRM might never see the light of day as the risks may outweigh the benefits. However, the idea will almost certainly move from the margins to the mainstream of climate action in the years ahead. India cannot afford to be a latecomer or bystander when those debates unfold. We should engage now—invest in science, build capacity and shape SRM governance—so that we have the body of knowledge and bench of experts to credibly contribute.

The author is director, Environmental Defense India Foundation.