Jessica said, " Maybe the thing to concentrate on is what would increase long lived soil carbon rather than photosynthesis." Thanks, Jessica, great idea. How about this? How to do long-lived storage in the sea, using natural processes?
On Wed, Nov 10, 2021 at 6:54 PM Jessica Gurevitch < jessica.gurevi...@stonybrook.edu> wrote: > 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 >> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/geoengineering/CAKSzgpY%2BwsJV%2BoDydH9fcXOdgPX5UEheUqkpZ5io2MfLozoQDw%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 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 > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/geoengineering/CA%2BPtSAPWgexkKYvxWkEGViyTaQQNiw2FAE8kXicYJcM0Fzp%2BRg%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 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 > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/geoengineering/5b2789a6-3faa-af9a-11d0-fa565c15e3ee%40uni-hohenheim.de?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 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 > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/geoengineering/7834B502-DA81-477D-9BD3-EFC3CCFF2320%40well.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 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 > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/geoengineering/F417A37C-AC85-4E6D-9F24-1E1910B509C3%40stonybrook.edu?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 geoengineering+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/geoengineering/CAKX06arNpURNaCvMahrMTNr0TS-Qg%2BF4_O6BVMmoYu2BMcdTKg%40mail.gmail.com.
