DSG, the American Geophysical Union, and the Council on Energy, Environment and Water (CEEW) and Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), launched the Solar Geoengineering Research Governance (SGRG) Platform, a shared, voluntary framework designed to make SRM research governance practices visible, consistent, and comparable across institutions and borders. This civil society-led initiative marks the first operational attempt to translate SRM governance principles into practice.

The Royal Society released a briefing on SRM emphasizing major scientific uncertainties, regional risks, and the need for robust international governance, while stressing that SRM cannot substitute for emissions reductions.

IUCN motion calls for development of a policy via an inclusive, participatory process, emphasizing equity, justice, respect for Indigenous peoples and local communities, and avoiding mitigation deterrence under the precautionary principle.

Parties reaffirmed that marine geoengineering activities—including techniques that modify cloud properties such as Marine Cloud Brightening (MCB)—fall under the precautionary approach, noted increasing small-scale trials, and re-established a correspondence group to clarify regulatory gaps and oversight needs by its next meeting in 2026.

The French Academy of Sciences published a report urging that SRM remain limited to research given significant uncertainties and regional risks, calling for robust international governance and strong precaution.

UKRI announced a £10.5 million research programme (2025–2030) under its Natural Environment Research Council (NERC) to model environmental responses to SRM and assess potential large-scale impacts.

The 20th African Ministerial Conference on the Environment (AMCEN-20) reaffirmed its call for a non-use agreement on solar geoengineering, urging African states to promote this position across multilateral arenas and work toward a resolution at the UN General Assembly, echoing a call for a global governance mechanism for the non-use of SRM at AMCEN-19.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) released new online resources addressing public concerns about ‘chemtrails’ and geoengineering. These resources, launched after conspiracy theories circulated linking recent catastrophic floods in Texas to weather modification, provide science-based information clarifying that contrails are often misidentified as chemtrails and that the U.S. government is not conducting weather modification or geoengineering programs.

The UK Parliament held a debate on ‘Geo-engineering and the Environment,’ following a petition with over 159,000 signatures calling for geoengineering to be made illegal. Members of Parliament raised concerns about potential risks and governance gaps, and the UK Government clarified that it is not deploying such techniques and has no plans to do so. No legislative action was taken.

The Governor of Florida signs bill SB 56 into law, banning geoengineering and weather modification activities in the state. The bill prohibits the intentional release of chemicals into the atmosphere to alter weather, temperature, climate, or sunlight intensity, and it classifies such actions as a third-degree felony with potential fines up to $100,000 and up to five years in prison, according to the Florida Senate

The Louisiana Legislature signed SB 46 (Act 95) into law, banning the intentional release or dispersion of chemicals into the environment of the state for the express purpose of affecting temperature; the law takes effect on 1 August 2025

The UN Environment Programme (UNEP) and World Meterological Organization (WMO) hosted a consultative Workshop and Science-Policy Dialogue on Solar Radiation Modification, supported by the International Science Council (ISC) and World Climate Research Programme (WCRP) to foster a shared understanding of the status of SRM science and research and to facilitate Science-Policy dialogues for a collective inquiry on this topic based on the updated science information.

The Degrees Global Forum brought together researchers, NGO representatives, policymakers, thought leaders, and journalists from around the world to discuss the scientific, social, and political dimensions of SRM in what was the largest conference to date on SRM

UK’s ARIA announces the 21 “Climate Cooling” Research Projects to be funded, making the UK government the largest funder of solar geoengineering research worldwide (USD $60 million).

The UN Secretary-General’s Scientific Advisory Board released a brief on Solar Radiation Modification (SRM), emphasizing scientific uncertainties and precaution, stating that SRM cannot substitute for emissions reductions, and recommending the establishment of a global governance forum and a scientific review mechanism.

The German Environment Agency (UBA) released a comprehensive report outlining the risks of SRM, with a primary focus on Stratospheric Aerosol Injection (SAI). The report calls for a global non-use agreement and recommends a binding ban on all SRM activities — including outdoor research — as a precondition for any research regulation. It highlights the CBD’s de facto moratorium and warns of normalization through public funding.

Arctic Ice Project announced the conclusion of its research after laboratory ecotoxicological tests highlighted the need for further study to reach definitive conclusions. The decision was made amid broad skepticism toward geoengineering, concerns over introducing new materials into the Arctic Ocean, and the Board’s assessment that securing the necessary global resources, collaborations, and funding remained a significant challenge

ARIA releases call for proposal applications to fund and the oversight committee for governance

European Union (EU) published three major reports – a Scientific Opinion, an Ethical Opinion, and an Evidence Review Report – to guide the European Commission (EC) in forming a position on the research and potential deployment of Solar Radiation Modification (SRM) technologies.

NOAA, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration and Sandia National Laboratories announce they are working together to build an early warning system to detect solar geoengineering.

The American Geophysical Union (AGU) publishes its Ethical Framework Principles for Climate Intervention Research—a code of conduct to guide the ethics of climate intervention.

UNEP publishes “Navigating New Horizons: A Global Foresight Report on Planetary Health and Human Wellbeing”, identifying SRM as a signal of change.

In a landmark opinion, the International Tribunal of the Law of the Sea (ITLOS) stated that marine geoengineering is incompatible with UNCLOS obligations where it transforms one type of pollution into another or fails to protect marine biodiversity. While the ruling primarily concerns marine-based carbon dioxide removal (mCDR), its principles may have implications for marine-based SRM approaches like MCB.

The first Marine Cloud Brightening experiment is shut down by the city government due to concerns raised by the local community and environmental groups about potential ecological impacts and the lack of public engagement.

ARIA (R&D funding agency, non-departmental public body, sponsored by the UK Department for Science, Innovation + Technology) announces intention to fund climate intervention social and physical science research and shares their theory of change.

The Tennessee state House of Representatives and Senate passed a bill to prevent technological climate interventions, including solar radiation modification and cloud seeding: "prohibits the intentional injection, release, or dispersion, by any means, of chemicals, chemical compounds, substances, or apparatus within the borders of this state into the atmosphere with the express purpose of affecting temperature, weather, or the intensity of the sunlight."

First US-based Marine Cloud Brightening Experiment launches in Alameda, California.

SCoPEx is cancelled. The Advisory Committee releases a final report summarizing its framework, work, and emphasizes the need for transparency, public engagement, and careful consideration of ethical and social implications.

SRM deliberations take place at UNEA-6 on the 2nd SRM proposed by Switzerland and initially co-sponsored by Guinea, Senegal, Monaco, Georgia and Israel. The resolution is eventually withdrawn after many discussions due to lack of consensus.

Environment and Climate Change Canada publishes its Science Strategy for 2024-2029, which includes activities to improve the understanding of SRM in the Canadian context.

The World Climate Research Programme (WCRP) launches a Lighthouse Activity (LHA) on Climate Intervention Research to explore potential future scenarios that include CI implementations and provide an objective overview of expected Earth system risks and opportunities, remaining key uncertainties, and associated knowledge gaps based on the rapidly evolving CI context/scene.

Stardust solutions becomes public in the news. Availability of information remains limited.

During COP 28, European Parliament makes a call to initiate a non-use agreement at the international level, "in accordance with the precautionary principle and in the absence of evidence of its safety and a full global consensus on its acceptability"

UNESCO's World Commission on the Ethics of Scientific Knowledge and Technology (COMEST) publishes a report on the ethics of climate engineering.

The Climate Overshoot Commission publishes its report "Reducing the risks of Climate Overshoot" with a booklet on emerging approaches in which the Commission recommends SRM to be researched and its governance discussed. It suggests countries should adopt a moratorium on the deployment of SRM and large-scale outdoor experiments that would carry risk of significant transboundary harm.

The African Ministerial Conference on the Environment (AMCEN) calls for a “global governance mechanism for non-use of solar radiation management.”

UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC) publishes its report on the impact of new technologies intended for climate protection on the enjoyment of human rights, which covered SRM.

In its scoping paper on Solar Radiation Modification, the European Commission requests that its Group of Chief Scientific Advisors addresses the risks and opportunities associated with research on SRM and its potential deployment, and to explore options for a governance system for research and potential deployment, considering different SRM technologies and their scale.

The U.S. White House Office for Science and Technology Policy publishes a research plan and governance framework related to SRM per a congressional mandate, focused on improving understanding of potential impacts, rather than deployment of SRM technologies.

UN High-level Advisory Board on Effective Multilateralism (HLAB) publishes “A Breakthrough for People and Planet,” which included a recommendation for a forum on the governance of climate-altering technologies.

An independent, multidisciplinary expert panel convened by UNEP publishes “One Atmosphere“, a report highlighting important knowledge gaps in SRM research, the importance of governance to guide research and decision-making, and the need for inclusive discussions on this subject.

110+ scientists published a letter supporting more research into atmospheric aerosol-based SRM.

140+ scientists issued a letter calling for more balanced, insight-based deliberation, research and assessment of SRM.

National Science and Technology Council and Secretariat of Environment and Natural Resources in Mexico announce national government's intention to ban SG experiments after news broke of Make Sunsets’ balloon launch in Baja California.

Make Sunsets launches in secret, becomes public in December 2022.

NOAA publishes a Scientific Assessment of Ozone Depletion, including a chapter on "Stratospheric Aerosol Injection and its Potential Effect on the Stratospheric Ozone Layer" to assess the effects of SAI on the ozone.

AGU starts project to create Ethical Framework for Climate Intervention Research, Experimentation and Deployment, draft principles include 8 recommendations.

IPCC Sixth Assessment report addresses SRM emphasizing the need for robust governance and risk assessment.

An open letter is initiated by 16 scholars calling for an International Non-Use Agreement on Solar Geoengineering calling on governments and the United Nations to ban deployment of solar geoengineering, but also calling on a ban of public funding, outdoor expeirmentation, and international assessment.

NASEM publishes second report on SG, "Reflecting Sunlight: Recommendations for Solar Geoengineering Research and Research Governance."

With the support of public funding, Southern Cross University conducts the first outdoor trial of Marine Cloud Brightening (MCB), where scientists test a prototype intended for use in larger-scale MCB experiments aimed at shading and cooling coral reefs to protect them from bleaching due to rising global temperatures.

Switzerland proposes an SRM resolution at UNEA-4 to prepare an assessment of the status of geoengineering technologies tabled by Switzerland w/support from Burkina Faso, Micronesia, Georgia, Liechtenstein, Mali, Mexico, Montenegro, Niger, Korea, & Senegal. The resolution was eventually withdrawn by Switzerland.

The Forum for Climate Engineering Assessment at American University publishes of "Governing Solar Radiation Management", setting out recomendations for governing SRM out to 2025, including creating politically legitimate deliberative bodies, leveraging existing institutions and making research transparent and accountable.

The Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) reaffirms its moratorium on geoengineering.

Code of Conduct for Responsible Geoengineering Research is published, promoting the near-term governance of geoengineering research and to guide responsible decision-making.

The Solar Radiation Management Governance Initiative (SRMGI) releases "Solar radiation management: the governance of research" report advocating for international research governance.

National Academy of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM) publishes "Climate Intervention: Reflecting Sunlight to Cool the Earth" providing a comprehensive review of SRM technologies and governance needs. The report stresses the need to reinforce mitigation as a priority and recommends the creation and implementation of an albedo modification research program and the initiation of a serious deliberative process to examine SRM research governance.

UNEP publishes the "Geoengineering to Combat Global Warming" report underlining that tampering with large-scale natural systems can have unintended side effects and their environmental social and legal implications need to be addressed.

The Asilomar Conference on Climate Intervention Technologies focused on establishing voluntary guidelines for the responsible conduct of geoengineering research, particularly SRM, to ensure that such research is conducted safely, transparently, and with appropriate consideration of environmental and ethical concerns.

CBD COP10 decision X/33 invites parties and other governments to ensure (...) "that no climate-related geo-engineering activities that may affect biodiversity take place, until there is an adequate scientific basis on which to justify such activities and appropriate consideration of the associated risks for the environment and biodiversity and associated social, economic and cultural impacts, with the exception of small scale scientific research studies that would be conducted in a controlled setting in accordance with Article 3 of the Convention, and only if they are justified by the need to gather specific scientific data and are subject to a thorough prior assessment of the potential impacts on the environment".

The Royal Society publishes "Geoengineering the Climate: Science, Governance and Uncertainty", which highlights CDR and SRM technologies as part of the suite of options for addressing climate chage, and calls for increasing research funding and the development of a code of conduct for said reserach.

The Oxford Principles are published as the first set of ideas around good governance, emphasizing transparency, public participation, and regulation to ensure ethical and responsible development and deployment of geoengineering.