Has the US government funded geoengineering research in recent years?

1. Congressional direction set the modern federal program in motion

In 2022 Congress explicitly directed the Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP), supported by NOAA and coordinated with NSF and DOE, to produce a five‑year federal research plan on “solar and other rapid climate interventions,” a step the Biden Administration followed with a 2023 Report to Congress that framed a federal research program as a way to inform risks, benefits and preparedness ^[1]. That direction is the clearest legislative action showing recent US government engagement ^[1].

2. NOAA has an active research portfolio focused on SRM questions

NOAA’s Earth’s Radiation Budget (ERB) Program — the competitive research arm of NOAA’s climate program office — explicitly supports projects to improve models, observations and assessments relevant to solar geoengineering, including stratospheric observations and studies of aerosol impacts and marine cloud brightening ^{[2] [1]}. NOAA has been described in reporting as having provided roughly $22 million across several recent fiscal years to projects related to geoengineering ^[3].

3. New appropriations and oversight language broadened federal involvement

Reporting and agency pages note that spending bills and appropriations language since 2019 and expanded in 2023–2024 included set‑asides and directions for NOAA to support research and to develop transparency, engagement and risk‑management guidance for publicly funded solar geoengineering work — including authority to review experiments ^{[4] [3] [1]}. Congress in 2024 further directed NOAA (with NASA and DOE, as appropriate) to improve understanding of aerosols, clouds and stratospheric observations ^[1].

4. Federal activity focuses on research, monitoring and “early‑warning” capability

Agency descriptions emphasize observational and modeling work — improving representations of aerosol‑cloud processes, stratospheric monitoring, and tools to detect unauthorized atmospheric interventions — rather than deployment or operational geoengineering ^{[2] [5]}. NOAA’s programs have been framed as preparing to understand risks and to detect possible actions by other actors ^[5].

5. Funding is still small relative to philanthropic and international sums, but rising

Multiple sources show that private philanthropy and international agencies are large players: the Simons Foundation, Quadrature Climate Foundation and other private funders have committed tens of millions, while UK agencies have made larger commitments ^{[6] [7]}. Still, federal spending on geoengineering research has increased from earlier years into the low tens of millions (NOAA’s ~$22M across several years is reported), meaning government is now a meaningful funder though not necessarily the dominant one globally ^{[3] [6]}.

6. Controversy, cancellations, and governance concerns shape how funding is framed

Public concern and governance debates have shaped both private and public funding. Some field experiments were canceled or constrained after public pushback (noted in background reporting on canceled experiments and municipal refusals), and academic and policy communities emphasize transparency and limits so research does not supplant mitigation ^{[8] [9] [10]}. The communication literature finds that public belief in secret government weather control complicates discourse, and around 20% of surveyed US respondents thought atmospheric modification was already ongoing — a perception that colors debates about government funding ^[11].

7. What the sources do not say (limits of coverage)

Available sources do not provide a comprehensive, line‑by‑line accounting of every federal dollar or exact fiscal‑year totals across all agencies beyond the cited NOAA ~$22M figure and references to Congressional directives ^{[3] [1]}. They also do not assert that the federal government has funded outdoor stratospheric release experiments in recent years; private and university programs (e.g., Harvard’s SCoPEx ties and funds) and philanthropic grants are documented separately ^{[8] [12]}.

8. Bottom line and competing perspectives

Fact: Congress and federal agencies have funded and structured research on solar geoengineering in recent years — mainly modeling, lab work and observation/monitoring — driven by Congressional direction in 2022 and agency programs like NOAA’s ERB ^{[1] [2]}. Perspective split: some scientists and advocates say careful federal research is necessary to understand risks and policy options; critics warn funding could distract from emissions cuts or legitimize risky interventions, and public skepticism is substantial ^{[9] [10] [11]}.