As global temperatures keep climbing from anthropogenic climate change, scientists and policymakers are increasingly discussing geoengineering (GE), which are large-scale technologies designed to either remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere or reflect sunlight away from Earth. But a new study asks a question that hasn’t gotten much attention: who actually believes geoengineering should be the top priority for fighting climate change, ahead of solutions that address the root cause like cutting greenhouse gas emissions, or adaptation measures?
RCEI Affiliate Steven Brechin, who is a Professor in the Department of Sociology at Rutgers University, co-authored the study alongside the lead author, Amanda Sie, graduate student in Sociology at Rutgers and awardee of RCEI’s Student Support Fund, and Christopher Borick of Muhlenberg College.
Using a nationally representative survey of over 600 U.S. adults, the authors found that most Americans don’t favor geoengineering at all. When asked to pick the single most important climate action, most people had chosen to change their own lifestyles or to support greenhouse gas reductions. Geoengineering came in last for preferred climate action. But a small group did prioritize it, and the researchers wanted to understand who these people are, and why they chose geoengineering. Future research should look to see if their numbers and preferences have changed.
People who prioritized geoengineering tended to be politically conservative, non-white, and to have high confidence in scientists’ ability to safely alter the climate. Yet they also tended to have lower concern about climate change and less worry about the environmental risks geoengineering could pose. The researchers call this emerging pattern “GE prioritization,” and it differs from previously studied behaviors, such as “mitigation deterrence”, or when geoengineering solutions look simpler to people than reducing their carbon footprint.
This distinction matters for policy. If certain groups are inclined to see geoengineering as a stand-alone fix rather than one tool among many, that could complicate efforts to build a successful climate strategy that can ultimately reduce carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.
“It may be the case that not many individuals will reduce their support for mitigation even if geoengineering is deployed. However, the people who do champion geoengineering over other forms of climate action may have a significant influence on climate policy. This study is a start in understanding this potentially influential group of people.” – Amanda Sie
You can read the full study here: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10584-025-04026-y
This article was written with assistance from Artificial Intelligence, was reviewed and edited by Kenneth Tam, and was reviewed by Amanda Sie and Steven Brechin, two co-authors on the study.
