http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/fact-or-fiction-geoengineering-can-solve-global-warming/

Fact or Fiction?: Geoengineering Can Solve Global Warming

Neither blocking sunlight nor capturing carbon can stop climate change

December 12, 2014
By David Biello

A global deal to combat climate change lurches toward reality in Lima,
Peru, this week—and yet any politically feasible agreement will be
insufficient to restrain continued warming of global average temperatures,
perhaps uncomfortably high. Although recent pledges by China, the 28
countries of the European Union and the U.S. are the first signs of the
possibility of restraining the endless growth of greenhouse gas
pollution on a long-term basis, atmospheric concentrations of carbon
dioxide have crossed the threshold of 400 parts per million—and will reach
450 ppm in less than two decades at present growth rates. The estimated one
trillion metric tons of carbon the atmosphere can absorb could be burned
through in even less time, particularly if India, as it develops, picks up
where China leaves off by burning coal without any attempt to capture the
CO2 before the greenhouse gas spews from smokestacks. The world may find
itself in need of another alternative, such as geoengineering, if
catastrophic climate change begins to manifest, whether in the form of even
more deadly heat waves, more crop-killing droughts, more rapid rises in sea
level or accelerating warming as natural stores of carbon—such as the
ocean’s methane hydrates—melt down, releasing yet more greenhouse gases to
drive yet more climate change. So maybe the answer is to genetically soup
up plants so they can pull more CO2 out of the air and then bury them at
the sea bottom? Or give the planet a giant sunshade, whether in the form of
more clouds or a haze of light-reflecting sulfur bits floating in the
stratosphere? "In a crisis the temptation will be to use the quick fix of
geoengineering," argued economist Scott Barrett of Columbia University at a
research symposium on CO2 capture technologies this spring. If civilization
continues, the unplanned, undirected geoengineering of the climate via
burning fossil fuels—whether coal in a power plant or oil sludge in a
massive container ship steaming across the Pacific—then perhaps nations
will need to plan for a directed attempt at geoengineering or the
"deliberate, large-scale manipulation of the planetary environment" as the
U.K.'s Royal Society defines it. Still, scientists are starting to agree
that geoengineering will prove insufficient for solving climate change. To
understand this it helps to think of two distinct flavors of climate
engineering: those that reduce greenhouse gases and those that block
sunlight to keep the planet cool. The various sun-blocking schemes could be
fast and cheap, like a fleet of airplanes spewingsulfur particles in the
stratosphere to mimic the cooling effects of volcanic eruptions or an
armada of ships brightening clouds by increasing the number of water
droplets within them. On the other side, carbon removal schemes are slow
and expensive, such as big air filters to suck CO2 out of the sky and bury
it, turn it into fuel or otherwise keep it from trapping heat. Or the
natural processes of rock weathering and plant growth that over geologic
time constrain climate change could be sped up. The Intergovernmental Panel
on Climate Change in its most recent comprehensive report suggested that
one member of this set of ideas—burning plants paired with CO2 capture and
burial, aka bioenergy with carbon and capture, or BECCS—might prove vital
to restrain global warming. And the U.S. Department of Agriculture provided
a $91-million loan guarantee in October to a company—Cool Planet—looking to
build a kind of BECCS facility in Louisiana to make biofuels and biochar, a
carbon-rich residual ash that can be used to improve soil fertility,
keeping the carbon out of the atmosphere. But neither flavor of
geoengineering can serve as a solution to climate change.

As outlined in the December Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society
A, sun-blocking schemes require continual refreshing and, at best, only buy
time for real solutions, such as cutting down on the amount of CO2 piling
up in the atmosphere as a result of fossil fuel burning, while failing to
account for other impacts such as the increasing acidity of the oceans. And
CO2 removal schemes could find themselves in a continuous game of catch-up
with the world's voluminous output of greenhouse gases—an ever-more onerous
burden if the world did nothing to restrain global warming
pollution. Geoengineering could play a role in coping with some of the
impacts of climate change, perhaps used to cool off the rapidly warming
Arctic and save summertime sea ice. Or "these strategies might be used
throughout the period required to replace fossil fuel burning with globally
distributed clean energy and even be continued while CO2 concentrations
remain too high," as atmospheric scientists put it in an overview of
the Philosophical Transactionsissue. Small-scale tests of such techniques
are therefore warranted to assess the real risks, such as unexpected
chemical reactions with the existing mix of atmospheric gases, for example.
Of course, it took massive emissions of CO2 to detect human-caused global
warming, suggesting small-scale tests may not reveal much. And even at a
miniscule scale engineering the climate remains a radical step with
consequences for both the climate and civilization that cannot be predicted
in advance. There is no technological fix for global warming other than the
hard work oftransforming a global energy system that relies on burning
fossil fuels into one that relies on energy sources—the sun, Earth's heat,
fission or, maybe some decade, fusion—that do not use the atmosphere as a
dump. The fact that geoengineering cannot suffice is good news because it
means that a viable form of climate engineering cannot undercut the urgency
of making that switch. No form ofclimate engineering can solve global
warming at present. To think so is science fiction.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"geoengineering" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to