That was a joke. I spoke English. They translated to French. Here is a
google translation back to English:
*Geoengineering "The likelihood of geopolitical frictions or even military
conflict would be high "*
Interview with Ken Caldeira, a climate scientist at the Institute Carnegie
and Stanford University in the U.S. and co-author of the fifth IPCC report
on Climate Change long-term climate.
*What is the purpose of the report on geoengineering recently presented 18
experts in Washington by your group Working Bipartisan Policy Center?*
* *
Ken Caldeira: We wish to promote the establishment of research programs
Federal on new approaches to reduce climate risks. Many ways to reduce the
concentration of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions have not yet been explored.
*
*
*What is geoengineering?*
Ken Caldeira: This approach aims to reduce climate risks associated with
GHG emitted into the atmosphere. There are two main categories of projects:
those which to remove carbon dioxide (CO2) emitted by humans into the
atmosphere ("carbon dioxide removal ") and the more controversial, that aim
to counteract warming due to greenhouse gases by reflecting sunlight back
into space ("solar radiation management"). Within the first category, one
of the most benign would be to plant trees, since they naturally absorb CO2
from the atmosphere. There are also approaches industry, such as injection,
into the ocean, chemical molecules or sediment. These projects have a very
high cost, however, local environmental impacts, and raise the issue of
land availability and are marked by logistical difficulties, a slow
implementation and a large-scale complex passage. In 2009, 8.4 gigatons
(Gt) carbon has been emitted by fossil fuels and deforestation by 1 Gt. So,
wanting 100% offset the emissions from fossil fuel use through
reforestation is impossible. Industrial projects of carbon capture and
storage (CCS) seem more effective, but their cost remains high.
*What about the project, more controversial, aerosol spray in the
atmosphere?*
* *
Ken Caldeira: It all started with the observation of a natural phenomenon,
the eruption Pinatubo volcano in 1991. The dust emitted during the eruption
remained during a full year in the stratosphere, which cools the atmosphere
by 0.5 ° C (aerosols reflect the sun rays). However, our models have shown
that if a similar amount aerosol was maintained continuously in the
stratosphere, it would offset the warming of 3 ° C expected in this century
(equivalent to a doubling of CO2 in the atmosphere). Such an aerosol mist
by a plane could be in continuous flight around the Earth at a cost
estimated at several billion dollars a year. This solution is feasible in
theory.
Of potential negative impacts exist, however. After the eruption of Mount
Pinatubo, the flow of the river system of the Ganges-Brahmaputra and
Amazon, have reached levels unusually low, due to lower rainfall associated
with artificial cooling of Earth.
So this could have adverse consequences for some countries in South America
or Asia? Ken Caldeira: Not necessarily. Simulations have indeed shown that
productivity agriculture would tend to increase if aerosols were injected
into the atmosphere because the reduction of heat stress on crops surpass
the effect of lower rainfall.
This type of geo-engineering would therefore compensate substantially, but
imperfectly, climate change. Our simulation models show that 90%
temperature changes and 70% changes in precipitation associated with CO2
could be compensated.
The effects of geoengineering are unlikely to be uniform on the planet.
*
*
*This risk does cause conflicts Geopolitical?*
Ken Caldeira: The effects vary from region to region and there will
certainly political differences on the decision to divert the sun's rays,
on the one hand, and on quantities involved, on the other. However, no one
would do well to generate climate that would destroy large areas of the
planet. The climate most conducive to productivity global economic climate
is good for everyone. Do you think a project like geo-engineering may one
day be deployed? Ken Caldeira: Only an extreme emergency would warrant, in
my opinion, as massive famines. It is indeed very difficult to imagine an
international consensus on a controversial subject, unless the situation is
really serious. Especially since, even if the system works as expected in
the model, extreme weather events, as heat waves and droughts, will always
be attributed. The victims will turn against the project initiators. The
probability of generating friction geopolitical or military conflict, would
be high. On the other hand, associated with a risk effects not predicted by
the models remains.
*What results will your team does it present to the Congress to WRCP Denver?
*
Ken Caldeira: We evaluated the consequences of an aerosol spray limited
polar regions, where climate change is said earlier, with the hope not to
interfere with the global climate. However, our results indicate that it is
not possible to confine the impact of a proposed geo-engineering on the
poles: the effects would be detectable on almost all of the Earth's
atmosphere. How geoengineering will she addressed in the fifth report IPCC
expected for 2013? Ken Caldeira: The idea of devoting a chapter to the
unique geo-engineering has been recently abandoned in favor of the
inclusion of the subject in several chapters, including one who is devoted
to aerosols. The report should summarize the state of knowledge, avoiding
value judgment.
*What exactly unknowns?*
Ken Caldeira: It is easy to calculate the temperature changes due to CO2 or
aerosols, but much more difficult to predict their effects on hydrology or
on ecosystems. The interactions of all these parameters (oceans, water
cycle, chemistry the atmosphere) in a complex system are not well known.
Remains, finally, the problem fundamental climate models which are
developed, are simpler than the real world and therefore can not foresee
everything. In return, the effects on ecosystems are, for example, not
included in our models. After the Pinatubo eruption, about 2% the sunlight
was reflected back into space and 20% were diffuse. More light has this
actually penetrated the lower strata of forests that have grown more
strongly this year.
*What do you think the recent postponement of a test of geo-engineering UK?*
* *
Ken Caldeira: This was only a test of verifying the feasibility of the
installation of a mist of water in the atmosphere, in order to replace a
day by a chemical compound. On the one hand, I believe that such a benign
experience should be allowed. On the other, I think this project is unwise
because it risks exacerbating the distrust of public's scientists,
politicians and businesses. The fear of the absence of a genuine Democratic
control for the tests of geo-engineering is a concern legitimate.
*How do you imagine the funding and governance of such system?*
Ken Caldeira: For methods of solar reflection, the costs are so low that
the funding is not a problem. Any big government could bear the cost
without serious impact on the budget. I am not an expert in governance. I
think the potential for a political or military conflict should prevent an
uncontrolled deployment.
_______________
Ken Caldeira
Carnegie Institution Dept of Global Ecology
260 Panama Street, Stanford, CA 94305 USA
+1 650 704 7212 [email protected]
http://dge.stanford.edu/labs/caldeiralab @kencaldeira
*YouTube:*
<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a9LaYCbYCxo>Climate change and the
transition from coal to low-carbon
electricity<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a9LaYCbYCxo>
Crop yields in a geoengineered
climate<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-0LCXNoIu-c>
On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 1:20 AM, Eugene Gordon <[email protected]>wrote:
> Good for you. Are you going to help us poor Americans without linguistic
> skills by translating back what they said you said?****
>
> ** **
>
> *From:* [email protected] [mailto:
> [email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Ken Caldeira
> *Sent:* Thursday, March 15, 2012 2:21 AM
> *To:* geoengineering
> *Subject:* [geo] Geoengineering interview published in the French
> newsletter on climate change and energy: L'Usine à GES.****
>
> ** **
>
> My French has improved remarkably. (see attachment)
>
> _______________
> Ken Caldeira
>
> Carnegie Institution Dept of Global Ecology
> 260 Panama Street, Stanford, CA 94305 USA
> +1 650 704 7212 [email protected]
> http://dge.stanford.edu/labs/caldeiralab @kencaldeira
>
> *YouTube:*
> Climate change and the transition from coal to low-carbon
> electricity<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a9LaYCbYCxo>
> Crop yields in a geoengineered
> climate<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-0LCXNoIu-c>
> ****
>
> --
> 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.****
>
--
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.
