Sadly, I know almost nothing about the benthos—we need marine ecologists to tell us about that! I’m strictly terrestrial and prefer dry upland systems myself. I even avoid fens, marshes, bogs and the like.
Sent from my iPhone > On Nov 10, 2021, at 10:52 PM, Ernie Rogers <[email protected]> wrote: > > > 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 >> <[email protected]> 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 <[email protected]> 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 <[email protected]> >>>>> 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 <[email protected]> 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 [email protected]. >>>>>> 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 [email protected]. >>>>> 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 [email protected]. >>>> 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 [email protected]. >>> 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 [email protected]. >> To view this discussion on the web visit >> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/geoengineering/F417A37C-AC85-4E6D-9F24-1E1910B509C3%40stonybrook.edu. -- 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/33FB6E39-063C-469C-A5A0-1371EF8EF3EC%40stonybrook.edu.
