Let me tell you an Aesop’s fable about the Town Mouse and the Country Mouse.

A Town
Mouse once visited a relative who lived in the country, and she talked about her life in the
city. After hearing about the luxurious life of the Town Mouse, the Country Mouse decided to
move to the city with her. However, when she realized that she had to risk her life to seek
mouth-watering food like sweetmeats and jellies, she eventually hurried away. In fact, this is
analogous to solar geoengineering. People who are in favor of this concept are somewhat
like the Town Mouse, whereas those opposing it, including me, believe that risk taking is
unnecessary. This speech is inclined to illustrate why solar radiation modification should not
be used as a way to combat climate change. To begin with, solar geoengineering may not
solve some of the key problems with climate change, and could even exacerbate some.
Unlike carbon capture, solar geoengineering isn’t reversing the effects of climate change by
removing greenhouse gas emissions from the atmosphere. It’s simply lowering Earth’s
temperature by reflecting sunlight away. According to the scientists in the new study, solar
geoengineering won’t suddenly make all greenhouse gas effects disappear overnight — but
it could affect plant photosynthesis and limit the habitat range of animals adapted to living in
colder climates. Secondly, solar radiation modification can have an adverse impact on the
ecosystem. Solar geoengineering could reduce global rainfall by up to 10 percent in certain
parts of the globe, which would naturally affect the local ecosystem. In particular, tropical
ecosystems and evergreen forests rely on rainfall for growth. Rainfall changes due to solar
geoengineering could affect vegetation, which affects the wildlife that feeds on that
vegetation. Last but not least, humanity doesn't know enough about this conception. It’s hard
to quantify the risks of solar geoengineering because we know so little about how solar
geoengineering would look in reality, or how it will intersect with different greenhouse
scenarios in the future. These limitations on our knowledge currently make it hard for
scientists to take a stance on solar geoengineering. What is more, while solar
geoengineering may cool the planet, the consequences could be devastating if we suddenly
stopped. According to a 2018 study published in Ecology & Evolution, sudden termination of
solar geoengineering could result in a scenario of rapid global warming that would occur ten
times faster than if we had never used the technology. Such a rapid rise in temperature
could wreck ecosystems and lead to a massive extinction crisis. Therefore, it is impossible to
experiment with solar geoengineering, now that once we start, we are forced to sustain.
Imagine you are a doctor, and you are operating on an ill-fated patient whose survival rate is
not high. During the operation, every decision of yours is crucial, and there must be no
mistake, now that any mistake will be fatal and you are not equipped with the ability to time
travel. The same case happens to solar geoengineering. It is of paramount importance that
experts all over the globe consider all the pros and cons deliberately, because any unwise
action may result in the extinction of mankind. Additionally, besides solar radiation
modification, there are multiple measures that we can take to ameliorate the burden of
climate change. For instance, carbon dioxide removal is deemed crucial to combating
climate change, according to the world’s leading scientists. There are many innovative ideas
for removing carbon dioxide and preventing it from returning to the atmosphere. But, there’s
a lot to learn about developing and scaling these ideas safely, equitably and effectively to
benefit surrounding communities and the environment. While some technological
approaches are early stage and expensive, they can become more commercially viable with
accelerated research and development. Just like in business, chances are that most
investors will bet big on a company that is likely to sustain stably rather than an unstable one
which poses countless risks. To sum up, it is my lifelong belief that it is inadvisable that solar
geoengineering come into practice, on account of these aforementioned justifications.