As you probably know greenhouse gas is a positive feedback on global surface
temperature but saturates when it becomes a black body. As the concentration
of greenhouse gas goes up the layer become blacker and blacker (in the IR
that is) As it becomes blacker the amount of radiation sent back to the
Earth's surface saturates. IT IS NOT A REFLECTOR NOR IS THE LAYER GOING TO
GET HOTTER AND RADIATE MORE ENERGY BACK AS THE EARTH WARMS UP. So there is a
concentration of CO2, methane, water vapor etc. above which the greenhouse
layer sends back a maximum amount of energy independent of the
concentration. The positive feedback saturates. Does anyone know what that
level is and what fraction of the radiation from the surface is currently
returned? In any case there is no tipping point and there may be a limit to
how high the surface temperature can go (of course there is a limit, it is
about 24 C). Geoengineering other than CO2 removal controls the forcing
function (the sun intensity at the Earth's surface). There is a lot of loose
talk about tipping points that needs to be eliminated. 
  _____  

From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Andrew Lockley
Sent: Tuesday, March 31, 2009 6:49 PM
To: geoengineering
Subject: [geo] the limits of geoengineering?


There's been quite a few suggestions on this list that we need to use
geoengineering whilst we still can. 

I'm not convinced by this argument, and I'd like to investigate how long the
'window of opportunity' for geoeng is.

Lenton and Vaughan found that Aerosols could counter a doubling of natural
CO2, and space sunshade (if possible) could go much further

This seems to suggest that we have quite a while to act.  Even in the even
of the start of a methane pulse which gives a doubling of co2 equivalent, we
can still ramp up geoengineering intervention quickly if needed.  I suggest
that we'd have at least 5yrs or so warning, even of a really sudden methane
pulse from permafrost.

However, the big risk, as I see it, is that ice-albedo feedback will be too
strong in the arctic to overcome with geoeng.  I know that re-freezing will
occur in winter, but the thickness of the ice may not be sufficient to last
all year, even with geoeng.  If this happens, we may be unable to stop the
methane pulse from permafrost occuring (if it indeed does).

I don't have the skills needed to do the complicated sums, nor do I have
access to clever computers that can do them for me.  Could someone therefore
suggest how long we've got before the 'window of geoengineering opportunity'
closes - if it indeed does?

A




--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"geoengineering" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to