The White House released a report on Friday outlining a plan titled “Congressionally Mandated Research Plan and an Initial Research Governance Framework Related to Solar Radiation Modification.” While Solar Radiation Modification (SRM) sounds benign, it describes a process of reflecting higher amounts of sunlight back to space by artificially altering either the Earth’s surface or the atmosphere. This is one of the extreme solutions offered to counter “global warming.”
“A program of research into the scientific and societal implications of solar radiation modification (SRM) would enable better-informed decisions about the potential risks and benefits of SRM as a component of climate policy, alongside the foundational elements of greenhouse gas emissions mitigation and adaptation,” the White House report said. “SRM offers the possibility of cooling the planet significantly on a timescale of a few years.”
While SRM has some powerful advocates, it remains controversial. Two years ago, a test run for the Stratospheric Controlled Perturbation Experiment (SCoPEx) funded by multi-billionaire Bill Gates would have released about 1,300 pounds of calcium carbonate into the upper atmosphere, approximately 12 miles over Sweden. The test was canceled at the last minute by the Swedish Space Corporation (SSC).
A smaller version of the test was carried out over Mexico’s Baja California peninsula last year. Directly after the experiment, the Mexican government announced a ban on solar geoengineering experiments.
The Congress-ordered report is not actually instituting any policy changes, but it is another step in the process of creating a federal geoengineering program.
“Climate change is already having profound effects on the physical and natural world and on human well-being, and these effects will only grow as greenhouse gas concentrations increase and warming continues,” the report said. “Understanding these impacts is crucial to enable informed decisions around a possible role for SRM in addressing human hardships associated with climate change.”
Some steps have already been taken. In 2019, Congress allocated $4 million to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration for stratospheric research, some of which was for solar geoengineering. And last year, the Biden administration announced a five-year research plan to explore the concept.
A 2021 report from the National Academy of Sciences called for the US to allocate up to $200 million to a research program to better understand solar geoengineering, including its feasibility, impacts on society and the environment, and public perceptions.
The report was released the same week that European Union leaders called for international discussions about solar radiation modification. It also followed a call by more than 60 leading scientists for more research on the topic.
“Guided by the precautionary principle, the EU will support international efforts to assess comprehensively the risks and uncertainties of climate interventions, including solar radiation modification, and promote discussions on a potential international framework for its governance, including research-related aspects,” the European Parliament and European Council said in a joint communication Wednesday.
The idea of SRM is to mimic the effects of massive volcanic eruptions, which have lowered global temperatures in a phenomenon known as volcanic winter. Violent eruptions can send volcanic ash and droplets of sulfuric acid into the atmosphere, obscuring the Sun and raising Earth’s albedo (increasing the reflection of solar radiation). Most recently, the 1991 explosion of Mount Pinatubo in the Philippines, the second-largest eruption of the 20th century, cooled global temperatures by about .9 Fahrenheit for about 2–3 years.
A 2018 Harvard study estimated a full-blown SRM program would cost around $2.25 billion a year over a 15-year period.
Other strategies of geoengineering were suggested in the Congressional report. . One method is to increase the amount of aerosols in the stratosphere in order to reflect the sun’s rays away from the planet. While this process can occur naturally after a major volcanic eruption, the effects of doing this artificially are unknown. Other methods include either increasing cloud cover over the oceans or reducing the amount of high-flying cirrus clouds. Cirrus cloud thinning targets wispy clouds higher up in the atmosphere, seeding them with aerosol particles in an attempt to thin them, so they trap less heat. Marine cloud brightening involves trying to make the low clouds over the ocean more reflective by spraying them with sea salt.
Some scientists have even gone as far as to propose blowing moon dust toward the Earth to act as a sun shield, reducing the amount of sunlight reaching the planet.
Opponents of geoengineering argue that modifying sunlight could alter global weather patterns, disrupt food supplies, or lead to abrupt warming if the stopped suddenly. It also wouldn’t address air pollution from fossil fuels or ocean acidification, a major threat to coral reefs’ ecosystems driven by the overabundance of carbon in the air and seas.
Some scientists fear that solar geoengineering could also damage the ozone layer that sits in the stratosphere between 15-30 kilometers above the earth. The ozone layer shields Earth from harmful ultraviolet rays. The ozone layer was discovered in the 1970s to have been seriously damaged by commercial use of chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs). A ban on the use of CFCs led to the ozone layer repairing itself.
These concerns led to a group of scientists initiating an online petition calling for an International Non-Use Agreement on Solar Geoengineering.
And, of course, skeptics warn of unexpected side effects.
Yuval Ovadia, whose videos on Nibiru have garnered hundreds of thousands of views, is skeptical of scientists using geoengineering to save the world.
“Even when it comes to much worse threats, like nuclear war, the elite and those who can afford it resort to preparing bunkers,” Ovadia told Israel365 News. “They think they can control the environment, and they also think they can control men. They think they can keep the populace calm by investing in projects that may or may not solve the problem.”
Ovadia compared geoengineering to the Tower of Babel.
“They think they can control men and god, heavens and the earth,” Ovadia noted. “Men in that age were on a very high spiritual level. They knew much more practical Kabbalah and could manipulate nature by using Lashon hakodesh (holy language). What they could do in the era before the Tower of Babel made today’s science look silly. That is how they were able to build a tower to heaven, something modern technology still cannot accomplish. So God came down and messed up their language so they could no longer manipulate nature.”
“Great deeds are not forbidden, but they require a purity of purpose, an attachment to the Divine,” Ovadia said. “This is a way in which those who only seem good but are actually not are weeded out. Who took part in the Tower of Babel? The very wealthy and the engineers, just like this new project to block out heaven.”
Ovadia noted that this very scenario was described by autistic children in Jerusalem, who rabbis frequently consult for their prophetic ability.
“The children said that scientists act as if they are God, as if they are in charge of the world and its destiny,” Ovadia said. “This is precisely what God hates the most. So he turns their own efforts against them.”