What are the 3Rs: Reduce, Remove, Reflect?
The 3Rs: Reduce, Remove and Reflect, are a combined package of actions that may be the only course of action to stop and reverse global heating.
Reduce combined with Remove should result in lower GHG concentrations; however, the impact on climate would be slow, largely due to the stored heat in the thermal mass of the ocean.
This necessitates the third R, Reflect (sometimes called Repair), which principally involves reflecting sunlight away from Earth. This is also known as as active cooling, solar radiation modification or albedo modification. Solar radiation modification could create immediate cooling to prevent temperatures that risk climate tipping points, acting as a 'safe passage' while we swiftly move towards near zero emissions and enhance global drawdown efforts.
The chart below captures the 3Rs in relation to time and impacts. While the 3Rs are implemented simultaneously, it’s only Reflect or active cooling that can get us back below the dotted orange danger line in the immediate term. Reduce and Remove will take longer, and Reflect is required until Reduce and Remove result in the desired cooling effect.
- Reduce: reduce greenhouse gas emissions to near zero
- Remove: remove or sequester excess greenhouse gases
Reduce combined with Remove should result in lower GHG concentrations; however, the impact on climate would be slow, largely due to the stored heat in the thermal mass of the ocean.
This necessitates the third R, Reflect (sometimes called Repair), which principally involves reflecting sunlight away from Earth. This is also known as as active cooling, solar radiation modification or albedo modification. Solar radiation modification could create immediate cooling to prevent temperatures that risk climate tipping points, acting as a 'safe passage' while we swiftly move towards near zero emissions and enhance global drawdown efforts.
The chart below captures the 3Rs in relation to time and impacts. While the 3Rs are implemented simultaneously, it’s only Reflect or active cooling that can get us back below the dotted orange danger line in the immediate term. Reduce and Remove will take longer, and Reflect is required until Reduce and Remove result in the desired cooling effect.
What are some examples for Reduce?
We must immediately and completely limit emissions as close to zero as possible to ensure we have a future left to protect, from all industries, including energy and mining, transport, consumption and manufacturing, agriculture, land use, and construction.
Many zero emissions plans for different sectors already exist. The Accord’s immediate demands are to:
Many zero emissions plans for different sectors already exist. The Accord’s immediate demands are to:
- Stop fossil fuel expansion.
- Phase out fossil fuel use and extraction, including Scope 3 emissions and emissions resulting from fossil fuel exports.
- Prevent and phase out sources of methane release.
What are some examples for remove?
There are two major groups of potential solutions for direct capture and sequestration: (1) biological (terrestrial and aquatic) and and (2) technological.
Biological solutions build on existing biological processes for 'sequestering' GHGs, e.g., photosynthesis and organic metabolism. Sequestration would involve using what existing organisms already do naturally -- with the added advantage that under suitable conditions that they can easily scale up to cover the globe. Terrestrial and aquatic systems offer potential solutions. For example:
The issue with many biological sequestration processes, including reforestation, natural soil carbon, etc., is that the carbon can easily be released through fire, drought, and other destructive processes. Moreover, even if we rewilded the whole world, we would only sequester what was released with the destruction of those ecosystems, not the additional ghgs released by burning fossil fuels. This is why it is essential to pair this process with the actions outlined in the first R, Reduce.
Technological solutions inevitably require gathering of resources (e.g., mining), logistics (transport of resources and components), manufacturing (assembly of the technology), global distribution of the assembled technology, and large amounts of energy to collect, compress, process and sequester the initially very dilute gases. All of these processes consume energy to work and potentially produce more GHGs that must be included in the volume of GHGs that must be sequestered. In other words, at this stage technologies that appear to work at the prototype level simply cannot be scaled up to practical global solutions.
Project Drawdown describes a wide variety of drawdown solutions which they categorise under land sinks, coastal and ocean sinks, and engineered sinks. They also rank these solutions by their potential to reduce or remove GHGs.
Biochar is organic waste burnt above 400C in a low oxygen environment. Biochar looks like charcoal and captures about 80% of the carbon in the material and also producing secondary useful products. Biochar itself is a great soil conditioner and highly valued in agriculture. Turning all bio-waste into biochar could prevent methane release while sequestering the CO2 in the waste for 100s to 1000s of years. (example - Barwon Water is biocharring sewage from Warrnambool).
(Pelagic) ocean fertilisation and farming of the ocean 'deserts' - The is potentially the most promising given that the relatively sterile deep ocean covering ~⅓ of Earth's surface consists of relatively sterile deep ocean where photosynthesis is limited by the availability of micronutrients like iron. Supplying this allows the microalgae to bloom. This crop can be harvested by a seeded and farmed ecosystem of zooplankton and larger consumers to package carbonaceous biomass into excrement and dead bodies that will drop into the abyssal depths for incorporation into the bottom sediment and so remain sequestered indefinitely.
Biological solutions build on existing biological processes for 'sequestering' GHGs, e.g., photosynthesis and organic metabolism. Sequestration would involve using what existing organisms already do naturally -- with the added advantage that under suitable conditions that they can easily scale up to cover the globe. Terrestrial and aquatic systems offer potential solutions. For example:
- forest restoration
- restoring forests on agricultural land
- peat mires
- farming sea-grass meadows
- mangrove farming
- (litoral) kelp and other seaweed farming
- (pelagic) ocean fertilisation and farming of the ocean 'deserts'
- whale faeces has very high concentrations of iron and is notable in iron fertilisation processes.
The issue with many biological sequestration processes, including reforestation, natural soil carbon, etc., is that the carbon can easily be released through fire, drought, and other destructive processes. Moreover, even if we rewilded the whole world, we would only sequester what was released with the destruction of those ecosystems, not the additional ghgs released by burning fossil fuels. This is why it is essential to pair this process with the actions outlined in the first R, Reduce.
Technological solutions inevitably require gathering of resources (e.g., mining), logistics (transport of resources and components), manufacturing (assembly of the technology), global distribution of the assembled technology, and large amounts of energy to collect, compress, process and sequester the initially very dilute gases. All of these processes consume energy to work and potentially produce more GHGs that must be included in the volume of GHGs that must be sequestered. In other words, at this stage technologies that appear to work at the prototype level simply cannot be scaled up to practical global solutions.
Project Drawdown describes a wide variety of drawdown solutions which they categorise under land sinks, coastal and ocean sinks, and engineered sinks. They also rank these solutions by their potential to reduce or remove GHGs.
Biochar is organic waste burnt above 400C in a low oxygen environment. Biochar looks like charcoal and captures about 80% of the carbon in the material and also producing secondary useful products. Biochar itself is a great soil conditioner and highly valued in agriculture. Turning all bio-waste into biochar could prevent methane release while sequestering the CO2 in the waste for 100s to 1000s of years. (example - Barwon Water is biocharring sewage from Warrnambool).
(Pelagic) ocean fertilisation and farming of the ocean 'deserts' - The is potentially the most promising given that the relatively sterile deep ocean covering ~⅓ of Earth's surface consists of relatively sterile deep ocean where photosynthesis is limited by the availability of micronutrients like iron. Supplying this allows the microalgae to bloom. This crop can be harvested by a seeded and farmed ecosystem of zooplankton and larger consumers to package carbonaceous biomass into excrement and dead bodies that will drop into the abyssal depths for incorporation into the bottom sediment and so remain sequestered indefinitely.
why near zero and not net zero?
Net Zero as a safe target is misleading because it implies that the current concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is safe, and therefore we can reduce carbon emissions to a “stable”, net level and have a secure future. We know that current GHG concentrations are not safe because:
The reality is that while we need to remove excess greenhouse gases, this should not happen instead of emissions reduction.
It’s the Accord’s position that as the status quo is untenable, the goal of the first two R’s – Reduce and Remove, is to create a carbon negative economy through absolute minimum carbon emission combined with passive and active removal of carbon from the atmosphere.
Net zero enables fossil fuels by supposedly offsetting their emissions with carbon credits / carbon offsets. The carbon offsets are based on either:
- current climate impacts are unacceptable
- warming is speeding up at current concentrations.
The reality is that while we need to remove excess greenhouse gases, this should not happen instead of emissions reduction.
It’s the Accord’s position that as the status quo is untenable, the goal of the first two R’s – Reduce and Remove, is to create a carbon negative economy through absolute minimum carbon emission combined with passive and active removal of carbon from the atmosphere.
Net zero enables fossil fuels by supposedly offsetting their emissions with carbon credits / carbon offsets. The carbon offsets are based on either:
- Sequestration of carbon, for example based on
- not cutting down a forest
- letting a forest regrow
- unproven carbon and capture technology
- not cutting down a forest
- Preventing carbon dioxide from being released via purchase of renewable energy certificates (REC). A 2024 study reviewing almost 40 years of data argues that RECs tend to discourage companies (those that purchase the RECs) from innovating to produce cleaner energy compared with other policies like environmental taxes and feed-in tariffs for solar energy.
WHAT ARE SOME EXAMPLES FOR reflect?
Reflect (sometimes called “Repair”) denotes any option that partially limits the amount of solar radiation that enters or remains in the atmosphere, land or water. Potential methods extend from ground level up into space:
- Enhanced Surface Reflection with Mirrors: This approach involves strategically placing large mirrors on the ground to reflect sunlight directly back into space (for example see MEER).
- Increasing Reflection of the Terrestrial Surface: Techniques like ice whitening or painting urban roofs and/or roads with reflective materials aim to increase the Earth's reflectivity. (California lightened its road surfaces for local cooling)
- Marine Cloud Brightening: By spraying fine sea water droplets into the atmosphere, this technique can increase the reflectivity of low-lying marine clouds.
- Cirrus Cloud Thinning: Thinning high-altitude cirrus clouds to reduce their heat trapping capacity.
- Stratospheric Aerosol Injection (SAI; AKA. Solar Radiation Management, SRM): SAI involves dispersing reflective particles into the stratosphere to mimic the cooling effect of volcanic eruptions.
- Space-Based Reflection Methods: Deploying reflective structures or materials in space to deflect a portion of solar radiation before it reaches Earth.
Could reflect occur in place of remove and reduce?
No. Active Cooling is a just bandaid measure to stop further devastation before Reduce and Remove have the desired impact. Reflect must not be used to further stall action across Reduce and Remove. As such the Climate Rescue Accord demands that Reduce, Remove and Reflect are implemented as a package.
While the full impacts of proceeding with Reflect (solar radiation management) alone are not fully understood, impacts would include ongoing ocean acidification and continued heating due to the further build up of greenhouse gases.
This letter from climate scientists demanding research into solar radiation management helps frame the issue.
While the full impacts of proceeding with Reflect (solar radiation management) alone are not fully understood, impacts would include ongoing ocean acidification and continued heating due to the further build up of greenhouse gases.
This letter from climate scientists demanding research into solar radiation management helps frame the issue.
Wouldn't reflect further delay emissions reduction?
Active cooling should only be considered as a temporary, emergency measure within a broader climate action strategy. This broader strategy must prioritise reducing greenhouse gas emissions to near zero plus additional removal of carbon from the atmosphere. This is why the Climate Rescue Accord promotes use of all three levers for action: Reduce, Remove, and Reflect.
Implementing active cooling without simultaneously taking aggressive action to cut emissions and remove existing carbon would not address the root causes of climate change or ocean acidification (another impact of burning fossil fuels) Therefore, alongside considering any form of albedo modification, strong policies must be enacted to ensure the fossil fuel industries and all sectors move swiftly towards eliminating carbon emissions. This dual approach ensures that albedo modification acts not as a crutch for continued carbon emissions, but as a part of a comprehensive emergency response to climate change, aiming for a safe climate future.
This is why we have to talk about the 3Rs as a package, not separate options.
Implementing active cooling without simultaneously taking aggressive action to cut emissions and remove existing carbon would not address the root causes of climate change or ocean acidification (another impact of burning fossil fuels) Therefore, alongside considering any form of albedo modification, strong policies must be enacted to ensure the fossil fuel industries and all sectors move swiftly towards eliminating carbon emissions. This dual approach ensures that albedo modification acts not as a crutch for continued carbon emissions, but as a part of a comprehensive emergency response to climate change, aiming for a safe climate future.
This is why we have to talk about the 3Rs as a package, not separate options.
Wait! We're already actively cooling the planet?
Yes. Burning fossil fuels we release particles into the atmosphere that reflect sunlight, causing cooling. This is called the aerosol masking effect as it masks the true level of heating from excess GHGs, and is also known as global dimming or albedo modification.
As we reduce our fossil fuel use to deal with the impacts of greenhouse gas emissions we will also be reducing the amount of these aerosols. This means as we reduce greenhouse gases or just the aerosols in those gases we should see a rapid increase in warming because we are also removing the reflective particles. We will need to compensate for the reduction in solar reflection to avoid additional global temperature rise. Cutting down methane emissions quickly might help balance the loss of the cooling effect provided by aerosols.
There is debate among climate scientists about how much cooling the aerosol masking effect contributes. With conservative estimates suggesting ~0.4C of cooling, while others think it could be as high as ~1.5C, with the higher estimates derived from newer data.
As we reduce our fossil fuel use to deal with the impacts of greenhouse gas emissions we will also be reducing the amount of these aerosols. This means as we reduce greenhouse gases or just the aerosols in those gases we should see a rapid increase in warming because we are also removing the reflective particles. We will need to compensate for the reduction in solar reflection to avoid additional global temperature rise. Cutting down methane emissions quickly might help balance the loss of the cooling effect provided by aerosols.
There is debate among climate scientists about how much cooling the aerosol masking effect contributes. With conservative estimates suggesting ~0.4C of cooling, while others think it could be as high as ~1.5C, with the higher estimates derived from newer data.
what are the risks of reflect / active cooling?
Albedo modification approaches do carry risks but each method has a different risk profile and potential impacts. Unfortunately, there hasn’t been enough research into albedo modification methods. Our first step must be to conduct careful research to understand both the risk and effectiveness of each approach and help inform consideration of their use.
As global temperatures continue to rise, the dangers posed by albedo modification methods could become comparatively less harmful than the severe consequences of unchecked global heating and the crossing of climate tipping points. Any consideration of using albedo modification must carefully balance the risks associated with these methods against their potential to contribute to achieving a safer climate, alongside the critical threats posed by global heating.
If a method poses too high a risk or its negative effects outweigh the climate crisis risks, it shouldn't be used. However, methods like enhancing surface reflection, which seemingly carry lower risks, should be considered as part of our climate action toolkit.
Albedo modification by use of aerosols may also impact some parts of the world differently - for example, the Indian monsoon could weaken. All such impacts must be taken into consideration when determining whether to use SRM.
As global temperatures continue to rise, the dangers posed by albedo modification methods could become comparatively less harmful than the severe consequences of unchecked global heating and the crossing of climate tipping points. Any consideration of using albedo modification must carefully balance the risks associated with these methods against their potential to contribute to achieving a safer climate, alongside the critical threats posed by global heating.
If a method poses too high a risk or its negative effects outweigh the climate crisis risks, it shouldn't be used. However, methods like enhancing surface reflection, which seemingly carry lower risks, should be considered as part of our climate action toolkit.
Albedo modification by use of aerosols may also impact some parts of the world differently - for example, the Indian monsoon could weaken. All such impacts must be taken into consideration when determining whether to use SRM.
What is the Earth-energy imbalance?
Earth’s energy balance describes the balance between the amount of absorbed solar energy (mainly from visible light) and the amount of Earth’s energy radiated to outer space (mainly in the form of infrared).
Currently, this balance is disrupted due to the buildup of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. These gases now trap a larger amount of the sun's energy than in the past, leading to global heating.
Three ways to correct this imbalance include: stopping greenhouse gas emissions (which is slow, see Reduce above), removing them from the atmosphere (see Remove above), or increasing the Earth's reflection of the sun's energy (see Reflect).
Currently, this balance is disrupted due to the buildup of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. These gases now trap a larger amount of the sun's energy than in the past, leading to global heating.
Three ways to correct this imbalance include: stopping greenhouse gas emissions (which is slow, see Reduce above), removing them from the atmosphere (see Remove above), or increasing the Earth's reflection of the sun's energy (see Reflect).
what does the IPCC say about the 3Rs: reduce, remove, reflect?
The IPCC gives both science on where we are climatewise (modelling), as well as recommendations on what to do about it. The 3Rs would fall into recommendations to achieve the goals.
Participating IPCC nations can veto any paragraph in the recommendations, so while the IPCC science on climate change isn’t necessarily politicised, the IPCC recommendations are.
The IPCC modelling itself is quite conservative in that the models rely on assumptions that aren’t really interrogated. Positive feedback loops, such as loss of Arctic summer ice, and release of methane from melting tundra, have only recently been taken into account, and only conservatively.
This article breaks down some of the discrepancies between the IPCC and other climate science.
Participating IPCC nations can veto any paragraph in the recommendations, so while the IPCC science on climate change isn’t necessarily politicised, the IPCC recommendations are.
The IPCC modelling itself is quite conservative in that the models rely on assumptions that aren’t really interrogated. Positive feedback loops, such as loss of Arctic summer ice, and release of methane from melting tundra, have only recently been taken into account, and only conservatively.
This article breaks down some of the discrepancies between the IPCC and other climate science.
what is the climate rescue accord's theory of change?
There are three main prongs to the Accord's theory of change:
- Educate other minor parties, independents and organisational stakeholders, including international stakeholders.
- Achieve minority government with a crossbench providing minority support for the 3Rs.
- Embed the 3Rs in international agreements.
does the Accord have quantified climate goals?
Hold global average temperature rise to the minimum possible, ensuring 2°C is not breached and temperatures return below 0.5°C.
Set a course to reduce greenhouse gas concentrations to preindustrial (safe) levels, based on credible scientific evidence.
Set a course to reduce greenhouse gas concentrations to preindustrial (safe) levels, based on credible scientific evidence.
