From the U.S. Government Accountability Office, www.gao.gov Transcript for: Watchdog Report: Issues Surrounding Climate Engineering Technologies Audio interview by GAO staff with Dr. Timothy Persons, GAO Chief Scientist Related GAO Work: GAO-11-71: Climate Engineering: Technical Status, Future Directions, and Potential Responses Released on: August 25, 2011 [ Background Music ] [ Narrator: ] Welcome to GAO's Watchdog Report, your source for news and information from the Government Accountability Office. It's August 25, 2011. Reports of rising global temperatures have raised questions about the human response to climate change, which could include technologies for deliberate, large scale intervention in the Earth's climate. A group led by Dr. Timothy Persons, GAO's Chief Scientist, recently assessed that status of climate engineering technologies and many of the issues surrounding them. GAO's Jeremy Cluchey sat down with Timothy to learn more. [ Jeremy Cluchey: ] What is the goal of climate engineering technologies and what's prompted their consideration? [ Timothy Persons: ] Well, climate engineering technologies represent direct and deliberate and even large scale interventions in the Earth's climate, and they generally aim at either reducing carbon dioxide, so called CDR, carbon dioxide removal technologies or solar radiation management technologies, or SRM. Now their consideration has been prompted by the rising concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere. The preindustrial concentration was approximately 280 parts per million, or ppm, and based on global industrialization and modernization processes, it currently resides at 390 parts per million, which is a concern to many scientists at this point. Even more of a concern is that it's projected to go over 500 ppm by the end of this century. And so ideas to engineer the climate back to a preindustrial state are designed to essentially unengineer what we have inadvertently engineered by releasing CO2 into the global ecosystem. [ Jeremy Cluchey: ] Can you talk about the different sorts of climate engineering technologies that have been proposed and which you look at in this report? [ Timothy Persons: ] In the CDR, or carbon dioxide removal, case we looked at things such as the director air capture of CO2, coupled with geologic sequestration of the CO2—and what that is was just directly capturing that what's currently 390 ppm from the air and then trying to store it under ground—over to ideas behind fertilizing the ocean with say iron filings in order to create phytoplankton balloons in the ocean that will greatly uptake CO2 through photosynthesis in the atmosphere. In terms of the solar radiation management, or SRM, we cover marine cloud brightening for example—which is the idea of spraying water mist up in the air in order to help enhance the brightness of clouds that will thus enhance the reflectivity of the clouds and therefore cool the planet—over to stratospheric aerosols. [ Jeremy Cluchey: ] And what does GAO conclude about the current status of climate engineering technology? [ Timothy Persons: ] We found that sense most climate engineering technologies are in the early stages of development none can be used to engineer the climate at a large scale at this time. There's considerable uncertainty surrounding the potential effectiveness of the technologies reviewed in part because they're immature. Using many of the CDR and SRM technologies we reviewed, we found that they would indeed pose some risk, some of which might not be known. So although minimal risks have been reported for air capture, for example, some risks are presented even in direct air capture based upon the idea of having to sequester the CO2 underground, and so short-term and long-term ecological, economic, and climatological risks from ocean fertilization, for example, remain uncertain. [ Jeremy Cluchey: ] For taxpayers who are interested in how the U.S. government will respond to rising global temperatures moving forward, what's the bottom line of this report? [ Timothy Persons: ] Given our assessment of their maturity, their potential effectiveness, their cost factors, and their potential consequences, climate engineering technologies are not now an option for addressing climate change. Our experts told us that gaps in collecting and modeling climate data, as identified in government and scientific reports, are likely to limit progress in future climate engineering research. Secondly, we found that the majority of experts we consulted supported starting significant climate re-engineering research now, and the advocates and opponents of research describes concerns about its risks and the possible misuse of it's results. So research advocates supported balancing such concerns against the potential for reducing future risks of climate change and they further envisioned a future federal research effort that would emphasize risk management; have an international focus, of course because engineering of the climate is a global endeavor; and then of course engaging the public and national leaders as well in terms of anticipating the trends and developments. Then lastly, in our survey the public suggested to us that they are open to climate engineering research yet they are concerned about its possible harm and they of course still support continued reductions of CO2 emissions. [ Background Music ] [ Narrator: ] To learn more, visit GAO's Web site at gao.gov and be sure to tune in to the next edition of GAO's Watchdog Report for more from the congressional watchdog, the Government Accountability Office.