2010: “Geoengineering III: Domestic and International Research Governance”

23 August 2026 | ZEROGeoengineering.com | “The purpose of this hearing is to explore the governance needs, both domestic and international, to initiate geoengineering research programs. Specifically, discussion will focus on governance to guide potential geoengineering research projects and which U.S. agencies and institutions have the capacity or authorities to conduct such research.” -Thursday, March 18, 2010, hearing held by the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Science and Technology entitled, “Geoengineering III: Domestic and International Research Governance.” | The following 2010 report documents Congressional discussion regarding geoengineering governance and research (experimentation) collaboration between the UK and the U.S..

Coordinating US Federal agencies, organizations, and academic institutions include: Natural Resources and Environment at the Government Accountability Office (GAO), the Center for Global Strategic Research at Lawrence Livermore National Lab, School of International and Public Affairs and the Earth Institute at Columbia University, The National Science Foundation (NSF), The Biological and Environmental Research program (BER) at the Department of Energy’s (DOE) Office of Science, National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), facilities located at Oak Ridge National Lab in Oak Ridge, Tennessee, the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), Forest Service and National Resource Conservation Service at the Department of Agriculture (USDA), United States Geological Survey (USGS) at the Department of Interior, and The U.S. State Department. These agencies are now coordinated under ICAMS (the Interagency Council for Advancing Meteorological Services).

“Geoengineering can be controversial because of the potential for environmental harm…”

“The Committee formally introduced the topic of geoengineering research in Congress on November 5, 2009 with a Science and Technology Full Committee hearing, “Geoengineering: Assessing the Implications of Large-Scale Climate Intervention.” On February 4, 2010 the Energy and Environment Subcommittee held the second hearing in the series, “Geoengineering II: The Scientific Basis and Engineering Challenges.” Together with today’s hearing, this series of hearings serves as the foundation for an inclusive and transparent dialogue on geoengineering at the Congressional level.”

“The following are examples of how existing research capacities in Federal agencies could be engaged in geoengineering research from the basic science and engineering behind the technology, to quantifying its effectiveness, and to understanding the risk of such hazards as environmental impacts.”

“The U.S. State Department would coordinate activities and agreements with foreign ministries for some geoengineering technologies. State Department involvement would depend, as noted, upon which activities are determined to impede upon existing international agreements or be associated with trans-boundary impacts. In addition, the involvement of more cabinet-level departments and Federal agencies may be useful for effective development of geoengineering research given the potential for associated agricultural, economic, international security, and governance effects.”

“Advocates of the “no regulation” approach may see government involvement as a stamp of approval for potentially unfavorable technologies…”

“International research consortia such as the World Climate Research Program (WCRP) could be used effectively to safely advance the science while building a community of responsible researchers. This would essentially provide a middle ground between the no regulation and international treaty options.”