• Invest in uplifting civil society voices rather than perpetuating the capitalist, extractive models that often dominate philanthropic funding for geoengineering.
• Funders must resist the adoption of techno-fixes as solutions, which risk perpetuating the existing extractive order under the guise of addressing climate change.

• Root Causes Ignored:
  • Geoengineering does not address the underlying drivers of the climate crisis (e.g., fossil fuel extraction, deforestation).
• Ecosystem and Community Risks:
  • Adds stress to ecosystems already under strain from climate change and biodiversity loss.
  • Introduces new threats to communities and human rights.
• Unproven and Risky:
  • Most technologies are unproven at scale, with many assumptions about their future efficacy.
• Distracts from Real Climate Action:
  • Undermines efforts to reduce emissions by creating a false sense of security.
  • Current focus on commercializing technologies for carbon markets perpetuates the status quo.
• Resource-Intensive:
  • Requires significant land, water, energy, and biomass, exacerbating global inequalities and resource exploitation.
• Governance Challenges:
  • Lack of democratic consensus on deployment.
  • Risk of exacerbating geopolitical tensions and potential weaponization of technologies.

• Geoengineering Does Not Address Climate Change’s Root Causes:
  • Geoengineering technologies focus on symptoms rather than addressing the ongoing emissions that drive climate change.
  • This creates “captive markets” for high emitters (countries, companies, and tech billionaires), aligning with their interests rather than systemic solutions.
• Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD):
  • A moratorium on geoengineering technologies (except CCS) was established in 2010 and reaffirmed in 2023 at COP16.
  • The moratorium highlights precautionary principles, the lack of proven safety, and concerns about irreversible social, economic, and cultural impacts.
  • The U.S., a major geoengineering proponent, is not a party to the CBD, which weakens the global applicability of the moratorium.
• London Convention and Protocol:
  • Prohibited ocean fertilization due to its damaging effects.
  • Currently assessing other marine geoengineering technologies, expressing alarm over their speculative nature and potential for widespread, irreversible harm.
• Human Rights Council:
  • Warns that geoengineering poses significant threats to human rights, particularly for indigenous and coastal communities.
  • Concluded that geoengineering technologies risk violating fundamental human rights and exacerbate inequalities.

• Over 40 companies are actively conducting marine geoengineering experiments, driven by carbon credit markets and voluntary carbon offsets.
• These ventures proceed without adequate scientific oversight or community consent, raising significant ecological and ethical concerns.
• Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS):
  • In 2021, a gas pipeline explosion in Sartosha, Mississippi, released carbon monoxide into the air, causing widespread health issues, including memory loss.
• Ocean Fertilization:
  • A 2011 experiment by Russ George in Canada led to toxic algal blooms in Alaska the following year, highlighting risks of large-scale geoengineering in marine ecosystems.
• SCoPEx by Harvard University:
  • Attempted solar geoengineering experiments over Indigenous lands in Arizona and Sami territories in Sweden met strong resistance.
  • Harvard dismissed Indigenous rights by claiming the global benefits of geoengineering supersede local rights.
• Arctic Ice Project:
  • Deployed silica microspheres over football fields in Alaska without Indigenous consent, raising health and ecological concerns.
• Rio Ice Project:
  • Claimed to involve Indigenous communities but consulted non-Indigenous municipal leaders instead, bypassing tribal consent.

• Indigenous groups and communities have resisted projects in New Mexico, Sweden, and the Caribbean.
• In Mexico, a company attempting solar geoengineering experiments with sulfates faced bans following community protests.
• Harvard’s “SCoPEx” project was halted by indigenous resistance, which opposed its potential to trigger larger-scale development.
• Marine geoengineering projects, like massive algae monocultures spanning 96,000 square kilometers in the Caribbean, face criticism for unknown ecological impacts.
• Prevention of harmful geoengineering research and experiments at the United Nations Environmental Assembly (UNEA).
• Reinforcement of the CBD moratorium, urging parties to implement the ban on geoengineering technologies.

• Lack of Free, Prior, and Informed Consent (FPIC):
  • Indigenous communities demand FPIC for projects impacting their lands, including funding stages, but it is often ignored.
• Cosmovision and Holistic Connection to Nature:
  • Indigenous cultures emphasize a sacred balance with ecosystems. Geoengineering, which treats nature as a manipulatable resource, disrupts this harmony.
• Cultural and Spiritual Erosion:
  • Geoengineering undermines traditional practices, languages, and spiritual relationships, endangering cultural identity and ways of life.
• Environmental Justice:
  • Projects disproportionately harm Indigenous communities through displacement, militarization, and ecological degradation.
• Historical Injustices:
  • Geoengineering reflects colonial attitudes, perpetuating marginalization and exploitation while offering no meaningful inclusion in decision-making.
• The Need for Indigenous-Led Solutions:
  • Acknowledging Indigenous wisdom and ecological stewardship is essential for equitable and sustainable climate solutions.
• Systemic Change:
  • The climate crisis cannot be solved with the same exploitative systems that caused it. Geoengineering perpetuates these systems, whereas Indigenous approaches prioritize harmony and sustainability.
• Healing and Justice:
  • Addressing the climate crisis requires a holistic, relationship-based approach that integrates Indigenous values, heals historical injustices, and respects both the land and its people.

• Displacement and Violence:
  • Geoengineering projects displace communities, increasing vulnerability to violence, human trafficking, and exploitation.
• Militarization:
  • Escalates physical, sexual, and environmental violence, particularly against women and girls.
• Exploitation of Resources:
  • Linked to resource extraction, geoengineering exacerbates conflicts over land and further marginalizes Indigenous peoples.
• Environmental Degradation:
  • Alters ecosystems, water sources, and weather patterns, compounding existing food insecurity and biodiversity loss.

• An interactive map tracks geoengineering projects, including ongoing and proposed experiments, providing transparency and oversight.

Geoengineering resource booklet CJI 2024-4