By Clara Botto, Director of Outreach
Over a year has passed since I joined as an observer in the Marine Cloud Brightening (MCB) fieldwork in Australia, which is part of the Cooling and Shading division of the Reef Restoration and Adaptation Program (RRAP), with support of the government. This MCB research is only one of many research projects trying to find ways to protect the Great Barrier Reef from the impacts of climate change, and should by no means be seen as a solution to the dreadful mass bleaching events that the reef has experienced over the past years, with the highest levels of thermal stress having been recorded this past summer. Rather than fixing it, cooling and shading in the area is seen as a potential palliative measure to be implemented when heatwaves are expected to hit the reef, thus preventing further distress and ecological damage to the marine ecosystem and all the life on land interconnected to it.
From the 27th of February to the 17th of March, 2023, I tagged along with the research team, both on the ground in Gladstone and on the sea around the One Tree and Heron islands. Places where the corals looked healthy when we went snorkeling in our free time a year ago, currently resemble a graveyard after severe bleaching events this past summer. Despite the year that has passed, which came with record temperatures in different parts of the world, and so much more news and knowledge production on solar geoengineering, some questions and concerns I had while in Australia still remain.
A year after my experience onboard, I talked to Holly Scoble, a Masters student from the Queensland University of Technology (QUT) who was also on the fieldwork with me, about her experience with MCB research and some things that could be improved.
Informing local communities
During my time in Australia, I learned a great deal – not only from the research team but also when talking about solar geoengineering with locals, whether with the crew in the research vessels, workers in Gladstone, tourists in Heron Island or students at the University of Sydney. With the exception of the crew, who could see the experiment and hear more about it every day as they were on board with the scientists, it seemed that they were all unaware of the fieldwork happening in their city or country, or in the case of tourists, right in front of their hotel some days.
The economy of Gladstone, the world’s fifth largest coal exporting port, is embedded in the fossil fuel industry. When I told a local shop worker about the MCB experiment, she commented, “So basically, our town has been helping to warm the planet, and your research team is trying to cool it? I wish we hadn’t got to this unfortunate point, but they’ve trapped us in this coal system.” This raises not only the issue of just transition, but its intersection with emerging technologies like solar geoengineering. It isn’t only about shutting down the coal industry without giving the workers who depend on it alternative jobs to rely on, but also about involving locals in the technologies and ideas that are being looked at such as MCB.
Q: I remember I had very interesting chats with crew members, locals and tourists about geoengineering. There was one for example who had heard about it when reading Superfreakonomics years ago and then happened to work on the research vessel for MCB, another one who thought MCB was cloud seeding and was somehow cautious of talking about it because of the Lismore floods, kids visiting Heron Island asking what that huge fog in the horizon was and their parents not knowing what to explain, climate activists at the University of Sydney who were very surprised to hear about geoengineering for the first time and that the only fieldwork in the world back then was happening at the Great Barrier Reef.
Do you think Australians, in general, don’t seem to know about this novel fieldwork that has been taking place in their own country since 2020? How do you think they could be made aware of it, and opportunities to engage with it, both at a local and national level?
Holly: I think you are correct in that many people in Australia, unless they already have a vested interest in the field research or in climate science, won’t be aware of the field research that is happening. This may be a by-product of any media of the field research falling to the wayside amongst reports of the current cost of living crisis, global political instability, and economic recession off the back of the COVID-19 pandemic. While I know that RRAP aims to ensure that all relevant stakeholders, such as the Traditional Owners of sea country, residents, community members and relevant governments are aware and involved in the project, it is interesting to hear how many everyday Australians you have mentioned in your interactions seem unaware of this field research. I couldn’t really say why this is, either.
It is exciting to not only know that Australia is leading the charge in field testing this technology, but to be involved in such a project with a focus on the survival of the Great Barrier Reef, which contains 25% of all known marine species and is essential for retaining biodiversity and secure food streams on the planet. As a scientist it is on one hand disheartening to know that this topic remains unheard of in some areas, however, conversely, any opportunity to promote the project’s aims is, in my opinion, a welcome opportunity for positive science communication.
The field test utilizes SRM techniques to brighten clouds over very small areas, particularly over vulnerable or high-value reefs, over a period of only a few hours to reduce solar radiation impacts on coral during marine heatwaves. While the approach to SRM is technically similar to our focus on the reef, it is important to point out that we are not looking to use this technology for global cooling purposes on a large scale.
During our first meeting, you described to me the potential for SRM applications on a global scale, and in particular, how they would require strong governance, open discussion and international agreement as a start. It is likely that an increase in awareness of field testing could promote a new topic of discussion on global SRM applications and assist with developing strong governance policies supporting climate change interventions.
The disconnection between policymakers and scientists
It was a surprise that the influential One Atmosphere report came out while I was in the living room with the research team in Australia. Even more surprising still was the fact that they weren’t aware of their mention in the report, and that UNEP didn’t have any contact with them before publication. This made me realize how disconnected governmental/intergovernmental agencies and research groups can be, and how needs to change if we are to foster transparency and global governance for solar geoengineering.
Scientists shouldn’t be expected to know about all the policy discussions happening on SG, and policymakers shouldn’t be expected to explain all the complexity of climate intervention science. Rather, both should work together to ensure cohesion, accuracy, and increased public trust.
Q: Do you remember how you got into this research program and what you knew/were informed about geoengineering before starting? As a scientist, what would you like to have known more about governance before fieldwork and/or during your studies?
Holly: When I first joined the project in 2023, I was interested in working on marine aerosols over the Great Barrier Reef, but I was not made aware of the SRM component. I had briefly learned about the mechanics of SRM during my Bachelors degree, but the requirements of governance of SRM had not been apparent to me yet. However, when I learned that the project’s first field test in 2020 was considered a world first in the field of SRM field testing, I was very eager to be involved. It wasn’t until I met you and spoke with you about some of the global applications and the need for strong international governance that I realized how large the scope of legislation would be. A background in social science or policy would have been useful to me, however, everyday I am learning more from very educated and experienced people. As this appears to be a developing field I believe we will see the majority of global SRM policy yet to come.
“Ethical fieldwork” or guidelines to conduct outdoor experimentation
I’ve often heard academics arguing there should be guidelines to follow when conducting solar geoengineering experiments. However, the reality is that at the moment research groups still do not have to follow any internationally agreed-upon rules of procedure. This poses a huge problem because it means that, even in their best interests, scientists can be causing both social and environmental harm in the area of experimentation.
Some of the good practices from the Australian MCB fieldwork include running community panels prior to fieldwork to both inform locals about the research and incorporate their feedback into the planning of outdoor experiments; co-designing field experimentation plans and locations with First Nations peoples, who are the Traditional Owners of the Great Barrier Reef area; and fostering interdisciplinary research, from coral ecology to mechanical engineering, for example.
Q: As a scientist who has worked on other topics and with the private sector as well, what other things do you think we could include in MCB research?
Holly: I expect that many scientists will disagree on this question- some will argue that stricter practices and guidelines make field work more expensive and difficult to approve, perhaps unnecessarily so. However, some scientists would argue that guidelines aim to protect the environment, social outcomes, as well as human health. Environmental harm under the guise of research should not be acceptable, however there are always inherent risks in research, which should be mitigated.
The research being undertaken by the project is aimed at small-scale reefs over short periods of time, and lengths have been taken during project planning to mitigate impact. However, I believe that strong guidelines are needed when conducting any experiments so that impacts to the environment are not caused. These should be especially considered when impacts have the potential to reach the global scale, such as large-scale SRM projects.
A heartfelt thank you to the research team and crew in Australia for opening their doors and allowing me to learn so much directly from them, inside labs looking at computer screens, monitoring clouds or snorkeling to marvel at the marine life wonders. I thank them not only for their kindness and patience but also for their resilience and drive to persevere trying to find answers to protect the beautiful life underwater and of those who depend on it. Whether that is possible through MCB remains an open question.