If energy was free, what could we do with geoengineering? It may seem a daft question, but bearing in mind that fusion power is only 40 years away (and always will be) then it is worth considering.
My understanding is that Lackner's 'fake plastic trees' are energy-hungry, and fusion could make them a lot more attractive. (Perhaps an alternative technology could be used to remove dissolved C02 from the sea.) However, there is a potentially serious problem with this. What if we emit such large volumes of secondary GHGs (eg methane) that we need to reduce CO2 below natural levels to control temperature? If we take CO2 too low, plants will not grow and we'll all starve. Wildfires would then act to balance CO2 levels. Previously, I've outlined my ideas for tackling methane to this list, but what if none of them worked? What would our options be? How practical would it be to 'overshoot' CO2? We wouldn't need to worry about stability anymore, as it would be so cheap to draw down the CO2 that we could just dump it in the deep ocean and pump down a bit more when it leaks. Leakage in an 'overshoot' world would possibly be an advantage - bringing up CO2 levels 'naturally' when the secondary GHGs had decomposed chemically or photochemically in the atmosphere. I just thought I'd ask for comments as to the kind of geoengineering our grandchildren will be able to engage in once they have the 'Mr Fusion' machines which power the cars in 'Back to the Future', but in a world where secondary GHGs are the primary problem. Comments please. I think it's worth a paper on this. 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
