This illustrates a central paradox of conservation economics: water tends to be too cheap to conserve relative to the mass of costly materials needed to conserve it.
With costs upwards of a Euro per square meter using sturdy textiles to save a hectare meter of ice on a sunny slope can rarely compete with piping water in from cooler north slopes. As with Christo's wrapped buildings, the Swiss project is more a work of conceptual art than water conservation. On Saturday, April 17, 2021 at 3:45:27 AM UTC-4 Veli Albert Kallio wrote: > Whilst wholly agreeing the conclusions of the study that the use of > geotextiles would be a distraction to draw funds away from decarbonisation, > it must be said that some countries dependent on water supplies from > glaciers can buy time by covering ice to remain longer as frozen reservoir > of water. It could also offer potential easement on excessive flooding by > spreading melt water pulses wider. It also did not point out that not every > glacier needs protection at the moment. While some glaciers would have to > be terminally abandoned, others could be taken into protection in their > place. Also, when glacier melts away, it no longer needs protection. In the > Andes several years ago the World Bank gave US$200,000 for painting a > mountain white to reduce local temperatures to enhance ice preservation and > snow formation. In Pakistan some tribes have planted glaciers successfully > in small scale. Numerous glaciers in high Arctic and Antarctic do not need > protection. > > I support wholly the argument that the scale of deployment is the biggest > obstacles for successful and effective geoengineering, either the scale > isn't large enough, or the effect isn't large enough to deliver > satisfactory benefits - hence our best option remains decarbonisation and > perhaps increasing forests where they can be increased to mop out some of > the carbon from the air (but even here scales are not enough). > ------------------------------ > *From:* [email protected] <[email protected]> on > behalf of Renaud de RICHTER <[email protected]> > *Sent:* 16 April 2021 18:43 > *To:* geoengineering <[email protected]> > *Subject:* [geo] [SRM] Geotextiles could slow glacial melt, but at what > cost? > > https://phys.org/news/2021-04-geotextiles-glacial.html > Geotextiles could slow glacial melt, but at what cost? > > by Isabel Amos-Landgraf, Earth Institute at Columbia University > <https://www.earth.columbia.edu/> > [image: image.png] > > A researcher stands in front of the Rhone Glacier covered in geotextiles > that protect it from accelerated melting. Credit: Matthias Huss > <https://vaw.ethz.ch/en/people/person-detail.html?persid=96677> > > In the Swiss Alps, some ski resorts and glacial tourist attractions are > using reflective blankets known as geotextiles to protect parts of glaciers > from accelerated summer melt caused by global warming. These businesses' > stable winter incomes enable them to fund the use of expensive geotextiles > during summers. If geotextiles are able to save small portions of glaciers > in the Swiss Alps, could they be employed on entire glaciers on a global > scale? A study published earlier this year argues that this strategy would > inevitably fail. > > Researchers at the University of Fribourg in Switzerland looked at nine > different Swiss sites currently using geotextiles to reduce glacial melt, > and analyzed the possibility of using geotextiles on a larger scale. While > the data in the study showed that these fabrics were able to locally reduce > glacial melt by 59%, it also revealed that this strategy is too expensive > to protect the more than 450,000 square miles of glaciers > <https://phys.org/tags/glaciers/> around the world. > > Geotextiles slow summer ice melt in a number of ways. The albedo of the > white textiles, or the reflectivity of their surfaces, is about 50% higher > than the albedo of glacial ice. When the sun's radiation hits the > geotextiles, a large amount of the energy that would have melted the ice is > radiated back into the atmosphere. The textiles also collect rain, the > evaporation of which cools the glacier. In addition, they provide > insulation that stabilizes the ice's cooler temperatures. > > At first glance, this technological adaptation to global warming > <https://phys.org/tags/global+warming/> is a promising solution for those > passionate about glacier preservation. However, like other technological > climate change solutions, such as carbon capture and storage or floodwalls, > using geotextiles on a large scale is expensive and potentially detrimental > to surrounding ecosystems. As a result, they have only been applied on > small scales, mostly in an effort to preserve profitable ski runs. > [image: image.png] > > One of the Swiss glaciers in the study covered annually to protect it from > melting. Credit: Matthias Huss > <https://vaw.ethz.ch/en/people/person-detail.html?persid=96677> > > According to the study, covering glaciers in Switzerland annually costs > between 0.60 and 8.50 U.S. dollars per square meter per year. At this rate, > the cost of installation and maintenance of a square kilometer of > geotextile coverage would range from $600 to $8,500. Using the average of > this cost range, $4,550, the cost of covering the total area of Swiss > glaciers (1,000 square kilometers) would be $4.5 billion dollars—a > significant expense, even for the wealthiest country in the world. The > total glacier area on Earth is roughly 250,000 square kilometers. Though > the cost per unit area would vary greatly from region to region, a rough > initial estimate, based on the cost for Switzerland, places the cost of > covering all glaciers at a bit above $1 trillion per year. > > Matthias Huss, a glaciologist at the University of Zurich and one of the > authors of the study, told GlacierHub why this is not the solution some may > hope it is. "You can put a blanket in one place on a glacier, let's say a > few hundred square meters, and you can very efficiently protect ice > locally. This absolutely works, but it costs > <https://phys.org/tags/costs/> a lot of money," he explained. "If you > have a corresponding economic revenue from the glacier, then this works. > Saving an entire glacier is a completely different story. You would need to > cover all of the ice on a much larger scale without a clear income benefit." > > Huss and his team of researchers concluded that attempting to prevent > glacial melt with geotextiles cannot replace efforts to mitigate greenhouse > gas emissions: finding ways to mitigate global warming must take precedence > over inefficient and expensive technological solutions to small-scale > effects of climate change. > > Christian Huggel, a professor of glaciology at the University of Zurich, > spoke with GlacierHub about the implications of this study. "The > conclusions confirm what we have been saying for a while: such geotextiles > may be a temporary solution for a very local problem of glacier loss but > are not scalable. And most importantly, they are by no means a solution for > the problem of glacier shrinkage," he said. "For this problem, the only > solution is to reduce CO2 emissions as much as possible." > > While this temporary and local solution does promise an extended life for > some of Switzerland's most valued ski slopes, it does not offer a solution > <https://phys.org/tags/solution/> for the most dire problem facing the > world's glaciers—the climate crisis. > > *More information:* Matthias Huss et al. Quantifying the overall effect > of artificial glacier melt reduction in Switzerland, 2005–2019, *Cold > Regions Science and Technology* (2021). DOI: > 10.1016/j.coldregions.2021.103237 > <http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.coldregions.2021.103237> > > -- > 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 view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/geoengineering/CAHodn99_9Uv7baVKs0h2sns7%2BSesUKLa%2BJM5JPOat8NNHjyqRg%40mail.gmail.com > > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/geoengineering/CAHodn99_9Uv7baVKs0h2sns7%2BSesUKLa%2BJM5JPOat8NNHjyqRg%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> > . > -- 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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/geoengineering/e8622f7f-72d4-4947-8e09-88fb6455c100n%40googlegroups.com.
