We hardly know what the impacts of SAI would be on ecological systems and we really need to learn more. My best guess (and it’s just an evidence-free guess at this point) is that some organisms and systems would benefit from SAI, perhaps greatly, and others would be harmed, maybe by a lot. Much of that depends on the details, like how much we reduce emissions at the same time. We need a lot more information. Certainly what we’re doing now to the atmosphere and biosphere is harming many systems and organisms, and causing extinctions and displacements. Some are thriving, though—unfortunately many of those doing well are cosmopolitan invasives.
In my opinion the benefits and risks to ecological systems are inextricably bound to the fate, well being and suffering of humans and human systems. Sent from my iPhone > On Nov 10, 2021, at 6:07 PM, Michael Kleeman <mklee...@well.com> wrote: > > > Irrespective of the benefits or risks of solar radiation management the > ecosystem impacts are real. > > And for reference deserts have a rich life and are sensitive to light, > pressure, vibration and general disruption. Different from forested area > but no less alive in their own way > > We need to be humble in the face of complex systems and not propose > simplistic interventions that make assumptions based on too little data. > >>> On Nov 10, 2021, at 12:55 PM, Oliver <oliver_bra...@uni-hohenheim.de> wrote: >>> >> Do you not think this is rather a kneejerk reaction? Is it as awful an >> idea as injecting thousands of tons of silver dioxide or similar materials >> into the stratosphere? An action which will influence the global weather for >> a minimum of 4 years if done at the equator. Now that is a truly awful idea. >> On the other hand, I would say that the consequences of lighting forests are >> more predictable, and the idea is scalable and can be stopped easily. >> In any case perhaps with some adjustment the idea may have merit. How about >> lighting desert plantations in marginal areas, not in pristine forest where >> delicate flora and fauna exist. Solar power can recharge batteries or >> lighting. Or extreme northern boreal forest, where few other animal forest >> species exist in large numbers. In areas of low radiation such a light boost >> may be just what it takes to increase productivity. >> >> Oliver >> >> -- >> Dr. Oliver Branch >> Inst. for Physics and Meteorology (120) >> University of Hohenheim >> Garbenstr. 30 >> D-70599 Stuttgart >> >> phone: 0711 - 459 -23132 >> >> >> On 10/11/2021 17:52, Jessica Gurevitch wrote: >>> This is a truly awful idea. These authors are apparently totally ignorant >>> of, or uninterested in, the natural world of ecological communities and of >>> biodiversity. Many, many organisms in tropical forests depend on nighttime >>> darkness to survive and function. The "unintended (or uninformed) >>> consequences" of this are horrifically mind blowing. >>> Jessica >>> >>> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >>> Jessica Gurevitch >>> Distinguished Professor and Co-Chair >>> Department of Ecology and Evolution >>> Stony Brook University >>> Stony Brook, NY 11794-5245 USA >>> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >>> >>> >>> On Wed, Nov 10, 2021 at 1:54 AM Geoeng Info <infogeo...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> https://esd.copernicus.org/preprints/esd-2021-85/ >>>> >>>> Exploration of a novel geoengineering solution: lighting up tropical >>>> forests at night >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Xueyuan Gao, Shunlin Liang, Dongdong Wang, Yan Li, Bin He, Aolin Jia >>>> >>>> Abstract. >>>> >>>> Plants primarily conduct photosynthesis in the daytime, offering an >>>> opportunity to increase photosynthesis and carbon sink by providing light >>>> at night. We used a fully coupled Earth System Model to quantify the >>>> carbon sequestration and climate effects of a novel carbon removal >>>> proposal: lighting up tropical forests at night via lamp networks above >>>> the forest canopy. Simulation results show that additional light increased >>>> tropical forest carbon sink by 10.4 ± 0.05 petagrams of carbon per year >>>> during a 16-year lighting experiment, resulting in a decrease in >>>> atmospheric CO2 and suppression of global warming. In addition, local >>>> temperature and precipitation increased. The energy requirement for >>>> capturing one ton of carbon is lower than that of Direct Air Carbon >>>> Capture. When the lighting experiment was terminated, tropical forests >>>> started to release carbon slowly. This study suggests that lighting up >>>> tropical forests at night could be an emergency solution to climate >>>> change, and carbon removal actions focused on enhancing ecosystem >>>> productivity by altering environmental factors in the short term could >>>> induce post-action CO2 outgassing. >>>> -- >>>> 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 geoengineering+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >>>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/geoengineering/CAKSzgpY%2BwsJV%2BoDydH9fcXOdgPX5UEheUqkpZ5io2MfLozoQDw%40mail.gmail.com. >>> -- >>> 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 geoengineering+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/geoengineering/CA%2BPtSAPWgexkKYvxWkEGViyTaQQNiw2FAE8kXicYJcM0Fzp%2BRg%40mail.gmail.com. >> >> -- >> 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 geoengineering+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >> To view this discussion on the web visit >> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/geoengineering/5b2789a6-3faa-af9a-11d0-fa565c15e3ee%40uni-hohenheim.de. > -- > 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 geoengineering+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/geoengineering/7834B502-DA81-477D-9BD3-EFC3CCFF2320%40well.com. -- 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 geoengineering+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/geoengineering/F417A37C-AC85-4E6D-9F24-1E1910B509C3%40stonybrook.edu.
