Republicans lawmakers have concerns about the government’s limited oversight of risky efforts to cool the planet by interrupting sunlight, according to a draft letter obtained by POLITICO’s E&E News.
The only legal requirement for organizations involved in geoengineering is to send a one-page weather modification form to NOAA before they try to block sun rays by increasing the reflectivity of clouds or by releasing light-limiting particles into the sky. Most of the forms received by the agency are filled with errors and missing information, a Government Accountability Office audit found earlier this year.
That audit helped spur the leaders of the House Science, Space and Technology Committee to write and sign a letter to NOAA requesting a staff briefing on the agency’s supervision of solar geoengineering and weather modification activities. The document was circulated by the committee but never formally sent to the agency.
“Because this research has local, regional, and potentially global consequences, the Committee seeks to ensure rigorous oversight, heightened scrutiny, and greater transparency in the information provided to NOAA,” Texas Rep. Brian Babin (R), who chairs the panel, said in a May 20 letter to Neil Jacobs, the agency’s acting administrator. It was also signed by Republican Rep. Rich McCormick of Georgia, chair of the Investigations and Oversight Subcommittee.
NOAA didn’t respond to a request for comment.
The Science, Space and Technology Committee is “considering going in a different direction” because “the letter has been shared with NOAA without our knowledge,” spokesperson Sarah Reese said in an email. “This draft reflected internal discussions.”
The draft letter is notable in part because its signatories have previously disputed the scientific consensus that climate change is primarily due to the burning of oil, gas and coal. After a 2017 trip to Alaska, where temperatures are rising faster than in other areas, Babin acknowledged that the planet was warming but said, “I think the big question is what is causing it.” In 2024, McCormick argued that efforts to reduce climate change were motivated by the “religion of carbon dioxide.”
Some environmentalists oppose solar geoengineering because they fear it could be used as a way to justify the continued burning of fossil fuels. The technologies would only reduce temperatures, not other harms of climate change like ocean acidification.
The two most studied types of solar geoengineering technologies are marine cloud brightening, which seeks to increase the density of sunlight-blocking clouds over the ocean, and stratospheric aerosol injection, which aims to use tiny particles to reflect sun rays back into space.
Both approaches have the potential to disrupt weather patterns on a regional or global basis. They could also cause temperatures to spike if they were widely used and then abruptly discontinued before climate pollution in the air reaches a safe level — a scenario that scientists refer to as termination shock.
Risks associated with not addressing climate change, scientists say, include increased sea-level rise, intensifying hurricanes, more frequent droughts and heat waves, and a longer wildfire season.
The main risk of weather modification, on the other hand, is that it doesn’t work. The process involves spraying moisture-attracting compounds into certain types of clouds to induce additional precipitation. Companies and countries have attempted to make it rain for decades, with inconclusive results.
Rainmaker Technology, a California startup, in April claimed that it had produced 143 million gallons of fresh water in parts of Utah and Idaho, which is roughly equivalent to the annual water usage of 1,750 households. “We are working to submit our results for peer review this summer,” Rainmaker spokesperson John Seibels said in a text message.
The House committee’s potential request for a briefing follows the 2024 cancellation of a solar geoengineering experiment in California due to intense community opposition. The marine cloud brightening program had sought to test equipment that could later be used to increase the density of sunlight-blocking clouds over the ocean.
It also comes after Stardust Solutions, an Israeli-U.S. startup, last week revealed its plans to produce millions of tons of reflective particles that could be sprayed into the stratosphere for governments. Critics say geoengineering companies should not be in charge of developing potentially planet-altering technologies, in part because they have a financial incentive to see their technologies deployed, regardless of the side effects.
Legislation seeking to outlaw solar geoengineering has been proposed in the House and in 37 states, according to data tracked by the nonprofit SRM360. State-level bans have been enacted in Florida, Louisiana and Tennessee.
