Sulfur, our saviour?

The problem of climate change is a serious one nowadays. Many solutions have been proposed to combat this change, one of which is to suspend sulfur particles in the atmosphere. This method reduces the temperature significantly in quick time. However, there can be several negative impacts of this method which should be taken care of before international leaders can primarily focus on it. Till then, leaders should focus on methods like controlling pollution and deforestation to combat climate change.

There is a high possibility that sulfur can be a health hazard if it comes down to earth. Sulfur particles can combine with rain water and come down as acid rain1. Acid rain can cause diseases like cancer and can result in premature deaths. Additionally, acid rain also adversely affects forests, insects, plants and freshwaters. Furthermore, it is also believed that the use of SRM can reduce rainfall to a large extent. A significant decrease in the amount of rainfall was recorded in the year following the eruption of Mount Pinatubo in Philippines3. Hence, it is inappropriate to focus on sulfur particles as it can create more problems for the environment.

Another problem in focussing on sulfur as the main method to fight against climate change is that failing to continue this scheme will increase earth's temperature very rapidly1. It is believed that the rate at which the temperature will rise will be much worse than the rate which was avoided by using this method. So, it is important to focus on ways to sustain the suspension of sulphur particles before making this scheme the main focus of international bodies to combat climate change.

Additionally, if countries choose to this scheme unilaterally, it can be very difficult to implement it. Countries might start neglecting the adverse effects of SRM in order to benefit their own citizens and start injecting sulphur particles without even consulting international organizations. This might adversely affect the environment instead of benefiting it. Therefore, it is not proper to focus on SRM now until the countries decide work on this method together.

Some people might argue that suspending sulfur particles is cheap and efficient and hence, it should be the main focus. I agree that this method is cheap, quick and effective. After the eruption of Mount Pinatubo in 1991, the sulphur particles cooled the earth's temperature by 0.9 degree Fahrenheit in the following year2. However, the possible negative impacts of this method are too strong to be neglected. It is highly important for scientists to do further research on a larger scale and come up with solutions for the possible problems, before SRM can be made the main focus of international leaders.

In conclusion, injecting sulphur particles can reduce the temperature of the atmosphere considerably. However, it is too early to primarily focus on this method as many shortcomings have not been taken care of. It is important for scientists and international leaders to first test this method on a larger scale and overcome its shortcomings. Till then, the leaders should focus on reducing the use of green house gases and hence, controlling climate change.

Reference: http://eggroup11.blogspot.com/2010/04/sulfur-our-saviour.html