As global temperatures approach 1.8°C above pre-industrial levels, discussions around a controversial climate intervention known as solar radiation modification (SRM) are gaining momentum in international policy circles. The world is expected to miss the critical 1.5°C warming target set by the Paris Agreement, and upcoming United Nations climate talks will focus on addressing the growing climate crisis. Historically, climate policy focused almost exclusively on mitigation—reducing greenhouse gas emissions—while adaptation, or adjusting to the impacts of climate change, was seen as a last resort. However, the failure to curb emissions has shifted the focus, making adaptation a central part of climate strategy. Similarly, the idea of actively removing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere has moved from skepticism to a key component of many countries' climate plans, including Australia’s net-zero emissions strategy. Solar radiation modification (SRM) refers to large-scale technological interventions designed to reflect a small portion of sunlight back into space, thereby reducing global temperatures. These methods include deploying space mirrors or using microscopic particles to make clouds more reflective. The most widely discussed technique is stratospheric aerosol injection (SAI), which involves releasing particles into the upper atmosphere to mimic the cooling effect seen after volcanic eruptions. While SRM could potentially lower global temperatures, it does not reduce carbon emissions and raises concerns about unpredictable ecological effects. Critics worry that focusing on such technological fixes might discourage efforts to cut emissions, while the sudden cessation of SRM—known as "termination shock"—could cause a rapid rise in temperatures. Recent warming trends since 2023 may reflect an unintended termination shock from reduced pollution that had previously cooled the planet. The international community has yet to establish clear policies or regulations for SRM research or deployment. Some scholars argue that such technologies "play God" with nature and advocate for a complete ban on both research and implementation. However, others believe that a ban on research is no longer feasible given the urgency of the climate crisis. As the planet approaches critical tipping points—such as the loss of polar sea ice, the collapse of the Amazon rainforest, and widespread coral reef degradation—SRM is increasingly viewed as a potential complement to emissions reduction, rather than a replacement. It could help limit the severity and duration of temperature overshoot while the world transitions to a low-carbon future. In Australia, there is currently no formal policy on SRM research or deployment, though federal funding has supported studies related to local climate interventions. For instance, the Reef Restoration and Adaptation Program (RRAP) has tested marine cloud brightening techniques over the Great Barrier Reef. While existing environmental laws may regulate small-scale research, they do not address the broader risks associated with SRM deployment. As the field of SRM research remains largely unregulated, Australia has an opportunity to play a leading role in shaping the ethical and policy frameworks for this emerging area. As a trusted middle power, Australia can help drive responsible research and public discussion on SRM, ensuring that any future deployment considers its global impacts and potential risks. The time to engage with this complex issue is now, as the climate crisis continues to accelerate and SRM is likely to become an integral part of international climate policy.