Hi Josh, As far as I know it was in response to a general call for comments (see intro to the HPAC response) here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1rByAkb7rBO8f5lMCKUcMqJPlaFuhftNi/edit
I don't know of any documents from the OSTP or the USGCRP on the proposed research program that have been publicly shared. Best, Ron Baiman (HPAC OSTP response drafting committee) On Fri, Sep 23, 2022 at 12:19 PM Josh Horton <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi all, > > Obviously I'm late to this conversation, but I have a quick question for > those of you who were engaged -- were the comments many of you submitted in > response to a draft plan or something similar made available by OSTP, or in > response to a general call for thoughts on research and research > governance? I assume it was the latter, but if it was the former can > someone please pass along any relevant documents? Thanks. > > Josh Horton > > On Saturday, September 10, 2022 at 2:14:25 AM UTC-4 Sev Clarke wrote: > >> My submission was: >> >> *THREE CLIMATE SOLUTIONS* >> >> >> >> *Introduction. *As harnessing industry is likely to be key to prompt and >> effective climate action and investment, the text in blue bold below >> indicates some of the industrial applications of the three conceptual >> technologies. Some of them should be profitable. Most await independent >> assessment, modelling, development, governance and deployment. Supporting >> documentation is available on request. The three technologies are currently >> under active investigation by a consortium of renowned research institutes. >> >> >> >> *Buoyant Flake Ocean Fertilization (BFOF)* is designed to nutriate >> oligotrophic surface waters with the necessary nutrients. Rice husks rich >> in opaline silica are coated in waste minerals containing iron, phosphate >> and trace elements using hot-melt lignin glue derived from straw or woody >> waste and a leavening agent to provide buoyancy. Reactive nitrogen is >> provided by nutrient-supplemented cyanobacteria that convert atmospheric >> nitrogen and CO2 into biomass. The flakes are pumped pneumatically from the >> holds of bulk cargo ships thinly over the sea surface, into which flake >> nutrients leach out over a year before the husks disintegrate and sink. >> >> >> >> Modelling should be able to establish the theoretical cooling effect >> provided by increasing the albedo of these waters by increasing their >> phytoplankton concentrations. Modelling and experimentation should also be >> able to estimate the increase in marine biomass that would likely be >> generated by such supplementary fertilization, together with its beneficial >> effects on ocean de-acidification and the moving downwards (sequestration) >> of the carbonaceous material contained in marine faeces, dead organisms, >> marine ‘snow', flake residuals, and the bicarbonate released by bacterial >> and chemical action. It has been estimated that this could sequester from >> 6-13GtC/yr in the ocean depths - at very low cost, or even profitably. >> >> >> >> The ultra-slow release of nutrients into nutrient-poor, and increasingly >> stratified, surface waters should allow a rich and stable marine ecology to >> develop. Furthermore, it would tend to prevent eutrophication and toxicity >> from occurring. The effectiveness of this proposed method has recently been >> given a major boost, as it was realized that krill and other diel, >> vertically-migrating (DVM) species form an Active Carbon Pump that, when >> supplemented by increased phytoplankton numbers fed by the minerals >> released by the buoyant flakes, could release sufficient carbon-rich faecal >> pellets and respiration at depth fully to offset annual anthropogenic >> carbon dioxide emissions. *The commercial opportunities offered by this >> technology lie mainly in the additional fish catch or fishing royalties >> that it could provide. In time, independently-verified carbon credits might >> also become monetizable from proven carbon sequestration. The increase in >> ocean cooling albedo caused by the solar-reflecting phytoplankton and their >> cloud-thickening emissions is unlikely to be monetizable, though beneficial >> to the biosphere and humanity. * >> >> >> >> Floating* Seatomizer* (seawater atomizing) units, powered by offshore >> wind farms, could spray seawater into the lower atmosphere to humidify the >> air, form high-albedo marine cloud, cool the surface water, restore coral >> reefs, increase off-planet heat flow, and irrigate the land with >> additional, gentle precipitation. BETE’s commercial spray nozzles, when >> adapted to use higher and triphasic pressures, might generate droplets in >> the right size distributions to produce sea salt aerosols, cloud >> nucleation, atmospheric humidification up to the point where saturation >> occurs, marine cloud forms or thickens, and rainfall or snow may be induced >> to fall at predetermined distances downwind - saving crops, forests, and >> homes. Performed in arctic warm seasons, ice albedo and thickness could be >> protected. >> >> >> >> Anchored arrays of Seatomizer units should be able to have significant >> regional cooling effects on the warming waters that power extreme weather >> events. The main effect is to increase the rate of evaporation of seawater, >> its turbulent uplift, and the subsequent long wave radiation of its >> released vapour heat content, on condensation, into space. A recent >> extension of this technology would allow for iron salt aerosols (ISA) to be >> sublimated to generate photocatalytic aerosols that destroy harmful >> atmospheric methane, black carbon, ozone and smog. *Economically cooling >> selected marine waters, including those related to sensitive mariculture >> operations. Desert re-greening.* >> >> >> >> The ice thickening concept of* Ice Shields* is designed to refreeze >> those parts of the polar and subpolar oceans that have been progressively >> losing ice for the last several decades, as well as to sequester surface >> ocean and atmospheric CO2 and O2. The means used are cold-adapted, >> commercial floating wind turbines powering seawater pumps to thicken, and >> possibly ground, sea ice by up to seventy metres per year. Ice shield array >> growth should: increase global albedo and cooling; stabilise the polar >> vortex; save the ice sheets and the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Current >> (AMOC); strengthen the marine biological pump; and help to control seabed >> methane emissions. >> >> >> >> The carbon dioxide and oxygen sequestration in the depths would result >> from the gases’ concentration in the fast chilling and salinating seawater >> brine flowing intermittently in thin sheets and rivulets down the >> gently-inclined, conical ice shields (like lava) and off them into the sea >> to sink by density rapidly to the seabed. The arrays of ice shields could >> eventually cover most of the polar regions and subpolar seas, leaving only >> open water for polynyas and surface marine passage by ships and wildlife. >> The brine flows would sequester for up to centuries the atmospheric >> CO2 dissolved in them, as it would react with seabed carbonates (shells, >> bones and limestone) to form benign, dissolved bicarbonate. The additional >> oceanic oxygen and cooling would be beneficial to most marine life. >> >> >> >> The thermals resulting from the heat released by the freezing seawater >> would convect ocean heat energy directly to the tropopause, whence it would >> radiate, almost unhindered by the otherwise-insulating GHGs, into deep >> space. In the non-freezing seasons, the seawater pumps could be applied to >> spraying low-micron, seawater droplets into the atmosphere so that it >> formed ice-protecting cloud cover. Some of the spare power might also be >> used for Seatomizer-like methane destruction by ISA. *As corporate >> involvement is likely to be an essential component of this solution, >> profits might be derived from government contracts, carbon credits, coastal >> stabilization, habitat protection, renewable Arctic wind power sufficient >> to power most of the northern hemisphere, and the harvesting of ebullient >> Arctic methane.* >> >> >> >> On Friday, September 9, 2022 at 8:57:15 AM UTC+10 Andrew Lockley wrote: >> >>> If anyone has drafted comments it would be great to see them here. >>> >>> A >>> >>> On Thu, 8 Sept 2022, 23:53 Ron Baiman, <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> *Request for Public Comments:* >>>> >>>> >>>> In the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2022, the White House Office >>>> of Science and Technology Policy >>>> <https://www.whitehouse.gov/ostp/legal/> (OSTP), in coordination with >>>> relevant Federal agencies, was directed by Congress to develop a five-year >>>> “scientific assessment of solar and other rapid climate interventions in >>>> the context of near-term climate risks and hazards. The report shall >>>> include: >>>> >>>> 1. >>>> >>>> the definition of goals in relevant areas of scientific research; >>>> 2. >>>> >>>> capabilities required to model, analyze, observe, and monitor >>>> atmospheric composition; >>>> 3. >>>> >>>> climate impacts and the Earth's radiation budget; and >>>> 4. >>>> >>>> the coordination of Federal research and investments to deliver >>>> this assessment to manage near-term climate risk and research in climate >>>> intervention. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> OSTP recognizes the importance of this research topic. With the >>>> assistance of the U.S. Global Change Research Program, OSTP is offering a >>>> brief comment period to enable public input while also providing a timely >>>> response to Congress. The focus of this plan will be on research >>>> associated with climate intervention, and comments are being requested in >>>> that context only. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Input should be narrative only (i.e., no figures, graphics, or >>>> attachments), should be limited to 1,000 words, should respond to the >>>> Congressional direction above, and should relate either to one of the four >>>> categories listed in legislative language or more generally to climate >>>> intervention research. Input must be submitted by 11:59 PM ET on >>>> September 9, 2022. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Posted, Aug 19, 2022 >>>> >>>> Open Notice, >>>> https://www.globalchange.gov/content/request-input-five-year-climate-intervention-research-plan >>>> >>>> Individuals interested in submitting comment should visit >>>> contribute.globalchange.gov >>>> >>>> *HPAC Submission* >>>> >>>> Healthy Planet Action Coalition USGCRP RCI Comment >>>> >>>> The Healthy Planet Action Coalition is a diverse international group of >>>> scientists, engineers, technologists, and public policy experts active in >>>> relevant fields spanning all aspects of climate change. >>>> >>>> We are united by a determined and informed optimism that a threefold >>>> approach can prevent climate catastrophes and restore a more benevolent >>>> climate. We call this approach “The Climate Triad”. >>>> >>>> The Climate Triad of Direct Climate Cooling (DCC), GHG Emissions >>>> Reductions, and Greenhouse Gas Removal (GHGR) works as a complementary >>>> system to stabilize and moderate the climate and ultimately restore a safe, >>>> healthy, and sustainable planet. Creating this system requires a >>>> collaborative, inclusive, and expedited research program with a priority >>>> focus on direct climate cooling. HPAC offers these recommendations for >>>> the development of such a program. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> (1) The definition of goals in relevant areas of scientific research >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> The Healthy Planet Action Coalition calls on the White House to set >>>> direct climate cooling, greenhouse gas removal and emission reduction as >>>> co-equal priorities. An overall goal of keeping temperature rise below >>>> 1.5°C could be achieved by a primary focus in this decade on cooling >>>> technologies to increase planetary albedo, cut radiative forcing, and >>>> implement other methods for direct climate cooling. Urgent direct climate >>>> cooling is now necessary to reduce current and near term human and other >>>> species harm and risk from current and near term future levels of global >>>> warming. Due to this urgency, we ask that the proposed five year research >>>> and implementation plan, depending on the method, be accelerated to one or >>>> two years. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> The following is a menu of proposed climate cooling approaches that we >>>> suggest merit early consideration and responsible investigation with >>>> actions that can be monitored and reported on: >>>> >>>> - >>>> >>>> Buoyant Flakes >>>> - >>>> >>>> Cirrus cloud thinning >>>> - >>>> >>>> Fizz Tops (Fiztops) >>>> - >>>> >>>> Ice Shields to thicken polar ice >>>> - >>>> >>>> Iron salt aerosol (ISA) >>>> - >>>> >>>> Making building and paving material more reflective and planting >>>> trees in urban areas. >>>> - >>>> >>>> Marine algal bloom stimulation >>>> - >>>> >>>> Marine cloud brightening >>>> - >>>> >>>> Mirrors for Earth's Energy Rebalancing (MEER) >>>> - >>>> >>>> Ocean thermal energy conversion >>>> >>>> >>>> - >>>> >>>> Restoring natural upwelling and kelp forest ecosystem services >>>> offshore >>>> - >>>> >>>> Restoring soil and vegetation >>>> - >>>> >>>> Seawater atomization (Seatomizers) >>>> - >>>> >>>> Stratospheric Aerosol Injection (SAI) >>>> - >>>> >>>> Surface Albedo Modification (SAM) >>>> >>>> Short summaries for most of these methods written or reviewed by >>>> climate cooling experts cited in the document are available here: >>>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1TowThwi6j6cX3iLGBRrj22D30cYhKa_9/edit >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Relevant scientific research on direct climate cooling methods and >>>> technologies currently being conducted include marine cloud brightening, >>>> stratospheric aerosol injection, sea-ice freezing, ocean thermal >>>> energy conversion, ocean and glacier microspheres, terrestrial and >>>> atmospheric mirrors, cirrus cloud thinning, iron salt aerosols, and white >>>> reflective rooftops and streets. >>>> >>>> Refreezing the poles should be a global climate priority in support of >>>> national and international security, biodiversity protection, and reducing >>>> extreme weather and sea level rise. US encouragement of COP27 in Cairo to >>>> set goals on albedo and biodiversity would sharpen research priorities. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> (2) Capabilities required to model, analyze, observe, and monitor >>>> atmospheric composition >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> A direct climate cooling program will require major capabilities in >>>> atmospheric science, enabling scientific experts to provide direct advice >>>> to government and industry on priorities and findings. Modeling, analysis, >>>> observation and monitoring of the atmosphere must guide climate >>>> intervention priorities and programs. Research, testing and deployment >>>> strategies require high level scientific skills in universities, supported >>>> by public and private investment. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> A way to encourage investment in cooling expertise is to introduce >>>> direct climate cooling credits as a more immediate climate offset than >>>> carbon credits. Coordination of atmospheric science with governance >>>> systems is essential to enforce ethical standards, ensure safety and >>>> consultation through transparent and accountable planning and delivery, and >>>> link with international diplomacy on programs such as refreezing the >>>> Arctic. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> (3) Climate impacts and the Earth's radiation budget >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> A focus on cooling technology is the best way to mitigate climate >>>> impacts and improve the Earth’s radiation budget in the near term, >>>> alongside ongoing work on emission reduction and GHG removal as they take >>>> effect over the longer-term. The best overall measure of climate impacts is >>>> radiative forcing, the excess of incoming over outgoing radiation at the >>>> top of the atmosphere. Government and private funds should be applied to >>>> methods that most effectively cut radiative forcing. Augmenting the >>>> current carbon credit system with a system of direct climate cooling >>>> credits would better cost the temperature impact of emission reduction, >>>> greenhouse gas removal and direct cooling technology. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> (4) Coordination of Federal research and investments to deliver this >>>> assessment to manage near-term climate risk and research in climate >>>> intervention. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> The USA should coordinate with other nations to develop a cooperative >>>> international program to refreeze the Arctic Ocean. Domestic US resources >>>> should be mobilized to support coordinated global and regional climate >>>> cooling. Arctic Amplification (with up to four times the temperature rise >>>> of the equator) and the role of Arctic sea-ice in regulating climate >>>> through the jet stream and ocean currents make the Arctic Circle the most >>>> serious planetary warming risk and cooling priority. Substantial cooling >>>> of the Arctic must be complemented by similar cooling of the Antarctic to >>>> achieve a stable global climate benefit. Ongoing disruption of these >>>> planetary systems is a major climate security risk, whereas action to >>>> reverse the disruption has benefits for peacebuilding, biodiversity and >>>> mitigation of warming. Climate security should be integrated with military >>>> security as part of national strategic priority setting and risk >>>> assessment. Diplomacy through the Arctic Council and COP27 and other >>>> relevant international bodies should engage on the urgency of cooling the >>>> pole, laying a foundation for the USA to work with other interested >>>> governments to test and deploy methods that will help reverse the current >>>> warming trend. Coordinated research and investment can be promoted by the >>>> USA taking a strong stance at COP27 and in other relevant international >>>> forums in favor of assessing direct cooling technology and refreezing the >>>> Arctic Ocean. >>>> >>>> -- >>>> 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/CAPhUB9AtiHkp7VHdDJBqBDG2DJAyOJ%2BJh5J%2BnmWQyY4TVoecpw%40mail.gmail.com >>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/geoengineering/CAPhUB9AtiHkp7VHdDJBqBDG2DJAyOJ%2BJh5J%2BnmWQyY4TVoecpw%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/bc20c165-6bf6-4de4-9183-556d751e959fn%40googlegroups.com > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/geoengineering/bc20c165-6bf6-4de4-9183-556d751e959fn%40googlegroups.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/CAPhUB9C4PmczNPGPBQ1NDE8Z%3Ds24MAg%3DA2ceR7BZWjX9_0-Fjw%40mail.gmail.com.
