Could Geoengineering Stop Heat Waves?

Scientists explore whether artificial volcanoes might beat the heat. David Biello reports

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

When Mount Pinatubo erupted in 1991, the injection of sulfur particles into the atmosphere cooled the planet. Taking inspiration from nature, some scientists have begun studying whether a man-made injection of such sulfate aerosols might stave off the worst of global warming. But could the technology also be used more locally to beat the heat?

That's the question explored by three U.C.L.A. scientists in a manuscript submitted to the journal Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics. Back in 2006, California endured a heat wave that lasted more than two weeks. The scientists ran a computer model to determine whether putting particles 12-kilometers up could cool the Golden State under such conditions.

The answer appears to be yes. Afternoon temperatures declined significantly in conjunction with the amount of particles boosted to the stratosphere. For example, emitting aerosols at rates of 30 micrograms per meter-squared yielded temperature decreases of roughly 7 degrees Celsius during the hottest part of the day.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


It's unclear how exactly the sulfate aerosols would get to the stratosphere absent a volcanic eruption. There would be effects downwind in the desert Southwest, including potentially even less rain. And the sulfates might eat away at the protective ozone layer.

So the researchers suggest that we might want to forestall worse heat waves in the future a different way—by cutting back on the greenhouse gas emissions causing global warming.

—David Biello

[The above text is a transcript of this podcast.]

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe