The symposium began with a presentation by Tiffany Shaw, professor in the Department of Geophysical Sciences and a member of the CSEi executive committee. Shaw provided a historical perspective on climate science, noting the groundbreaking contributions of Syukuro Manabe. In the 1960s, Manabe developed the first climate models to show how rising greenhouse gas concentrations drive global temperature increases. His models successfully predicted temperature changes that were later confirmed by real-world data over decades, a breakthrough that earned him the 2021 Nobel Prize in Physics, which he shared with Klaus Hasselmann.
Though Manabe’s model and other contemporary climate models have accurately predicted many aspects of climate change, some major differences remain between model projections and real-world observations—such as the southwestern U.S. being much drier than climate models forecasted.
“We’ve made a lot of predictions over the last 60 years. But as the real world now manifests discrepancies with that information, we need to balance the scales to better understand why the real world is doing something differently than we expect,” Shaw said.
However, Shaw emphasized that uncertainty should not be an excuse for inaction. Emerging technologies like machine learning are helping researchers analyze climate systems at increasingly fine scales, offering new insights and more precise predictions.
Following Shaw’s talk, Erin Adams, Vice Provost for Research at the University of Chicago, and David Keith, professor in the Department of Geophysical Sciences and the Faculty Director at CSEi, held a fireside about climate systems engineering. Keith defined CSEi as consisting of three pillars: solar geoengineering, a technique that aims to reflect more sunlight away from Earth to counteract the warming effects of greenhouse gases; open systems carbon removal, which includes processes like rock weathering to permanently remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere; and ways to reduce glacial melting.
Keith then laid out a series of “four dimensions” to address the climate problem. First is decarbonizing the economy, second is carbon removal or capture, third involves local changes to infrastructure or behavior, and fourth is solar geoengineering.
“There are four dimensions to the problem, and I think we need to take them seriously. We may decide not to use some of them, but I think those are the only knobs we have available to turn,” Keith said.
Throughout their chat, Adams and Keith explored the ethics, potential impacts, and feasibility of climate intervention methods like solar geoengineering. Keith emphasized that decades of research suggest the benefits of these approaches could outweigh their side effects.
“This isn’t to say there is a right answer about whether we should do it or not. That’s a policy judgment. As a scientist, I can’t tell you what the right answer is,” Keith said.
With no global framework currently in place for governing these technologies, Keith stressed the importance of open, transparent conversations to help the public understand both the risks and potential benefits.
The symposium concluded with a panel discussion on the relationship between science and the public, focusing on the themes of public trust and engagement. Shaw and Keith were joined by Rachael Kotarski, Associate University Librarian for Digital Strategy and Services, while Adams moderated the discussion. The panelists underscored a growing decline in public trust toward science and academic institutions, noting that this distrust makes it more difficult for people to stay informed about climate change and potential solutions.
“There’s this perception that educational institutions are places of indoctrination. But what we’re really here to do is teach people how to think, not what to think,” Kotarski said.
To address the growing distrust between the public and universities, panelists emphasized the importance of community-focused science outreach efforts, such as the University of Chicago’s Southside Science Festival. They also stressed the need for universities to better communicate their role in shaping informed policy decisions.
While science can confidently explain how CO₂ emissions contribute to global warming, decisions about reducing emissions require balancing both scientific evidence and political considerations.
“I don’t think our vote on these questions should be any bigger than anybody else’s,” Keith said. “It can’t just be what the scientists say, and finding a way to make that division clearer might make more trust in science.”
js_250213_103156_8205.arw
js_250213_114250_6365.arw
js_250213_112558_6096.arw
js_250213_102245_8130.arw
js_250213_091112_7463.arw
js_250213_100902_7874.arw
js_250213_100127_7813.arw
js_250213_123652_6469.arw
David Keith
