Comparative political risk of gigaton-scale ERW nuclear detonation versus ongoing climate change

Determine which scenario poses a greater risk to global political stability: detonating an approximately 81-gigaton buried nuclear device beneath the Kerguelen Plateau to pulverize basalt for Enhanced Rock Weathering—an action that would violate or require exceptions to nuclear non-proliferation and testing treaties—or allowing climate change to progress according to current estimates with its associated geopolitical tensions, climate refugee flows, and altered international power dynamics.

Background

The paper evaluates the feasibility of using a buried nuclear explosion to pulverize basalt for Enhanced Rock Weathering (ERW) at a scale sufficient to sequester large amounts of CO2. In the political feasibility discussion, the authors note that detonating such a device—even for peaceful purposes—would conflict with existing nuclear treaties and could affect global nuclear politics, though they suggest possible mitigation via transparency and treaty exceptions.

The authors also describe how climate change is already reshaping global politics through resource competition, refugee movements, and evolving security considerations. They explicitly state uncertainty about which of these two paths—pursuing a gigaton-scale nuclear detonation for ERW or enduring the political consequences of climate change—poses the greater risk to the international political landscape.