Re: [geo] Exploration of a novel geoengineering solution: lighting up tropical forests at night

[Jessica Gurevitch]

You are raising very valid points. Also, if the trees run out of nitrogen,
water, etc., which seems very possible, they will stop photosynthesizing
and taking up carbon. It is an interesting idea, but the authors have not
considered many of the limitations and unwanted effects of this idea, which
are very large.
There has been some work on using solar panels to light crops at night to
increase production, which is also interesting, but doesn't do much for
reducing carbon (the crops are harvested after each growing season and
used, so the carbon cycles back to the atmosphere almost immediately).

~~
Jessica Gurevitch
Distinguished Professor and Co-Chair
Department of Ecology and Evolution
Stony Brook University
Stony Brook, NY 11794-5245 USA
~~


On Mon, Nov 15, 2021 at 6:59 PM Claudia Wieners 
wrote:

> Original idea, but apart from worrying about unwanted side effects for the
> ecosystem and technical questions about the maintenance of all these lamps,
> cables etc, I wonder whether 16 years is on the short side. Would it not
> take longer than that for the forest to equilibrate, i.e. reach a state
> where the extra uptake is compensated by an extra emission of CO2 from
> rotting biomass? I.e. maybe negative feedbacks kick in only after the 16
> years?
> Of course, the new forest would have a bigger reservoir of carbon, but in
> equilibrium it would maybe stop being a sink. Yet one would have to
> continue lighting the forest forever or at least a long time to keep the
> carbon in the forest because after termination the carbon is released
> again. So some form of direct air capture might have the advantage of
> storing the carbon more safely without constant energy input (for a ton
> already stored).
> Finally, note that Keller et al 2015 did an experiment - admittedly in an
> intermediate complexity model - where they assumed they could afforest the
> whole Sahara (let's just assume for a moment that it could be done
> somehow...). They found significant carbon uptake during the growth of the
> forest but after about 50 years the forest equilibrated, acting as a
> storage but no longer as a sink. And the storage thus created was far, far
> smaller than anthropogenic emissions till now, though of course one might
> argue that there is no silver bullet and one shouldn't dismiss any
> carbon-reducing measure *purely *on the ground that it alone cannot fully
> solve the problem.
>
> Are there any biosphere experts here who can confirm or contradict my
> concerns? Am I mistaken?
>
> Op wo 10 nov. 2021 om 07:54 schreef Geoeng Info :
>
>> 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

Re: [geo] Exploration of a novel geoengineering solution: lighting up tropical forests at night

[Claudia Wieners]

Original idea, but apart from worrying about unwanted side effects for the
ecosystem and technical questions about the maintenance of all these lamps,
cables etc, I wonder whether 16 years is on the short side. Would it not
take longer than that for the forest to equilibrate, i.e. reach a state
where the extra uptake is compensated by an extra emission of CO2 from
rotting biomass? I.e. maybe negative feedbacks kick in only after the 16
years?
Of course, the new forest would have a bigger reservoir of carbon, but in
equilibrium it would maybe stop being a sink. Yet one would have to
continue lighting the forest forever or at least a long time to keep the
carbon in the forest because after termination the carbon is released
again. So some form of direct air capture might have the advantage of
storing the carbon more safely without constant energy input (for a ton
already stored).
Finally, note that Keller et al 2015 did an experiment - admittedly in an
intermediate complexity model - where they assumed they could afforest the
whole Sahara (let's just assume for a moment that it could be done
somehow...). They found significant carbon uptake during the growth of the
forest but after about 50 years the forest equilibrated, acting as a
storage but no longer as a sink. And the storage thus created was far, far
smaller than anthropogenic emissions till now, though of course one might
argue that there is no silver bullet and one shouldn't dismiss any
carbon-reducing measure *purely *on the ground that it alone cannot fully
solve the problem.

Are there any biosphere experts here who can confirm or contradict my
concerns? Am I mistaken?

Op wo 10 nov. 2021 om 07:54 schreef Geoeng Info :

> 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/CAJUUK5cAzC0F%3D%3DhBEjWRomu9WUz3dp7WSEmsa66jS7HQ4p7AoA%40mail.gmail.com.

[geo] Request for Proposals: Social Science Research into Solar Geoengineering

[Geoeng Info]

https://www.rff.org/topics/comprehensive-climate-strategies/request-for-proposals-social-science-research-into-solar-geoengineering/

Request for Proposals: Social Science Research into Solar Geoengineering

Overview

For more than 60 years, Resources for the Future (RFF) has been a leader in
improving environmental, energy, and natural resource decisions through
impartial economic research and policy engagement. The RFF Solar
Geoengineering Research Project seeks to improve our understanding of the
risks, potential benefits, and other uncertain implications of solar
geoengineering as one approach among others to address climate change.
Building on the results of a recent series of international workshops
convened with the RFF Solar Radiation Management Dialogue, RFF is
soliciting social science research proposals that address crucial gaps in
our knowledge of solar geoengineering and its possible impacts.

Research Themes

This research is structured along five general social science themes and
approaches to understanding solar geoengineering, which are listed below
and elaborated upon in (Aldy, et al. *Science*, 2021
).
The list of topic areas below is a summary of possible examples, and it is
not exhaustive of what could be considered for funding:

   - interdisciplinary work among social and natural scientists to address
   the gaps in our SG understanding most relevant for decision-making,
   - convening experts on SG and international relations, along with the
   use of game theory and behavioral experiments and simulations, to better
   understand the possible evolution of SG strategies and countermoves,
   - numerical modeling to integrate the climate and social systems and to
   understand how multiple interactions “add up” in a consistent framework,
   - assessments by sociologists and cultural anthropologists, as well as
   science and technology studies scholars, to understand how norms and
   culture evolve as new technologies enter the policy space, and
   - applications of behavioral science to explore the mental models of
   relevant decision-makers in government and throughout society with respect
   to SG and other climate risk reduction strategies.

Funding and Allocation

Eight separate $10,000 honoraria will be awarded for the development of
eight research papers that are suitable for publication in a peer-reviewed
journal. Teams are welcome to supplement this funding from other sources.
Expectations

Research teams will produce a scientific research article suitable for
submission to a peer-reviewed journal. The RFF Solar Geoengineering
Research Project will host a virtual workshop in May 2022 for teams to
present initial findings, receive feedback, and meet one another.  Full
first drafts will be due and presented at a conference in September 2022
where at least one member of each team must attend. Assuming we are able to
hold the meeting in person, RFF will cover the cost of travel for one team
member; it need not come from project honoraria. Finalized papers that are
ready for submission will be due November 1, 2022.
Eligibility

Climate change and the potential development of solar geoengineering are
global issues. The RFF Solar Geoengineering Project encourages proposals
from scholars drawing from a rich array of social science disciplines and
from across the world.
Application Instructions and Deadline

To apply, please submit:

   - A one-page cover sheet including:
  - proposed paper title
  - for each member of the research team (with the lead author listed
  first for multi-author teams), the person’s full name, title,
professional
  address, country, telephone number, and email address
   - a project description of no more than 1,400 words (not including a
   list of citations), with the following:
  - the research topic and research question, falling under one of the
  five themes listed above,
  - the methods and analyses the authors intend to undertake.
  - how the proposed research fits into and advances the academic
  literature, and
  - how the research could inform policy related to solar
  geoengineering.
   - the CV(s) of all authors on the team.


Submit all application materials (one proposal and all team member CV(s))
as pdf attachments in an email to solar...@rff.org. Proposals must be
received by Friday, December 17, 11:59 pm U.S. Eastern to be considered.
Awards will be announced on January 13, 2022.
Contact

Contact the RFF Solar Geoengineering Project (solar...@rff.org) with any
questions.

-- 
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