[geo] bill proposing NAS study on geoengineering

[Douglas MacMartin]

FYI; McNerney (D-CA) was the main person pushing for the US house hearing last 
month; this bill asks the National Academies to look at governance and research 
needs.  (This would be purely on the solar geoengineering side, to complement 
the existing NAS study on CDR.)

 


 

 Rep. McNerney Introduces Groundbreaking Geoengineering Bill 

EastCountyToday (press release) (blog) 

The legislation, cosponsored by SST Ranking Member Eddie Bernice Johnson, would 
commission the National Academies of Science (NAS) to produce two reports 
recommending a geoengineering research strategy and oversight principles for 
such research. These reports would build on two ...


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 Flag as irrelevant 

 

 

-- 
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 post to this group, send email to geoengineering@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [geo] Could this geoengineering venture help save the ice caps?

[Andrew Lockley]

I don't agree with Stephen's analysis. Nanomaterials have a totally
different toxicity profile to the bulk material. Sand doesn't float - and
having it at the ocean surface causes a whole range of ecosystem effects -
predictable or otherwise

A

On 8 December 2017 at 18:20, lou del bello  wrote:

> I am just writing a 500 words straight piece where I profile this idea,
> not dissimilar to the original idea posted.
> I am inclined to leave out any super technical debate that I can't explain
> very clearly in 100 words, but will send the link to the story once it's up
> and the story will be open to comments.
>
> Does that seem sensible?
> I don't want to write a puff piece but if there aren't any super obvious
> and massive issues I don't have space for too much detail...
>
> On 8 December 2017 at 18:11, Stephen Salter  wrote:
>
>> Andrew
>>
>> Silica is chemically identical to the main constituent of beach sand so
>> it is more 'natural' than SO2. It ought to be safe provided that the
>> spheres are too big to get into people's lungs and start silicosis.
>>
>> Hollow spheres will initially float but when colonised by any
>> hard-shelled organism will sink.  This can happen to buoys.
>>
>> We need numbers for weights, transport and dispersion technology to
>> reflect solar energy equivalent to the latent heat from ice loss.
>>
>> Stephen
>> Emeritus Professor of Engineering Design. School of Engineering,
>> University of Edinburgh, Mayfield Road, Edinburgh EH9 3DW, Scotland
>> s.sal...@ed.ac.uk, Tel +44 (0)131 650 5704 <0131%20650%205704>, Cell 07795
>> 203 195 <07795%20203195>, WWW.homepages.ed.ac.uk/shs, YouTube Jamie
>> Taylor Power for Change
>> On 08/12/2017 17:43, Andrew Lockley wrote:
>>
>> This issues I see (briefly) are as follows
>> 1) non-natural substance - in contrast of SO2, mimicking volcanoes
>> 2) mass flux likely FAR higher per unit of forcing (many orders of
>> magnitude)
>> 3) deposition would be into ocean - unclear if it floats or sinks. If
>> floating, will be eaten by surface animals, and end up covered in
>> plankton/algae. If sinking, would end up in sediments, and possibly
>> ingested (esp in shallow waters)
>> 4) sheer impracticability of distribution in remote and hostile areas
>>
>> A
>>
>> On 8 December 2017 at 15:43, lou del bello 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Dear all, I am covering this just now (within the next hour or two) for
>>> Futurism.com
>>> Any comment or suggestion on things to highlight and potential pitfalls
>>> of this idea would be greatly appreciated.
>>>
>>> Best,
>>>
>>>
>>> Lou
>>>
>>> On 8 December 2017 at 01:19, Renaud de_Richter 
>>> wrote:
>>>

 *Could this geoengineering venture help save the ice caps? *
 https://www.greenbiz.com/article/could-geoengineering-ventur
 e-help-save-ice-caps
 * By Sue Lebeck *
 Wednesday, December 6, 2017

 http://www.ice911.org/el-panamericano/
 http://www.ice911.org/testing-1/


 With hundreds of cities
  and
 businesses pledging to bend the curve on carbon emissions by 2020
 ,
 scientists and researchers are looking into how to buy time against climate
 change wherever they can find it. One way is by seeking opportunities to
 slow the rapid warming currently underway.

 Leslie Field, founder and CEO of Ice911 , a
 Silicon Valley nonprofit research corporation, has been doing just that
 .
 Field — a micro-electro-mechanical systems and nanotechnology consultant,
 Stanford consulting professor and inventor — has been collaborating with
 other scientists and engineers to "restore the earth's refrigerator by
 slowing down the melt of polar ice," as she explained to me recently. Now,
 the organization is seeking ways to scale its idea.

 "After extensive field testing, we have the technology, the team and
 the experience to significantly reduce the impacts of climate change by
 2020 and give the world time," she said.

 I first met Field in 2013. At the time, Ice911 was still her
 "inconvenient hobby," as she liked to call it. "Watching the movie 'An
 Inconvenient Truth'
  on a June
 evening in Palo Alto changed the path of my life, starting from the moment
 I walked out of the theatre," Field reflected. The movie "made it clear
 that the Arctic is a key lever for climate change."

 Indeed, the situation in the Arctic has grown even more urgent since
 that time. As noted professor of ocean physics Peter Wadhams explained
 

Re: [geo] Could this geoengineering venture help save the ice caps?

[lou del bello]

I am just writing a 500 words straight piece where I profile this idea, not
dissimilar to the original idea posted.
I am inclined to leave out any super technical debate that I can't explain
very clearly in 100 words, but will send the link to the story once it's up
and the story will be open to comments.

Does that seem sensible?
I don't want to write a puff piece but if there aren't any super obvious
and massive issues I don't have space for too much detail...

On 8 December 2017 at 18:11, Stephen Salter  wrote:

> Andrew
>
> Silica is chemically identical to the main constituent of beach sand so it
> is more 'natural' than SO2. It ought to be safe provided that the spheres
> are too big to get into people's lungs and start silicosis.
>
> Hollow spheres will initially float but when colonised by any hard-shelled
> organism will sink.  This can happen to buoys.
>
> We need numbers for weights, transport and dispersion technology to
> reflect solar energy equivalent to the latent heat from ice loss.
>
> Stephen
> Emeritus Professor of Engineering Design. School of Engineering,
> University of Edinburgh, Mayfield Road, Edinburgh EH9 3DW, Scotland
> s.sal...@ed.ac.uk, Tel +44 (0)131 650 5704 <0131%20650%205704>, Cell 07795
> 203 195 <07795%20203195>, WWW.homepages.ed.ac.uk/shs, YouTube Jamie
> Taylor Power for Change
> On 08/12/2017 17:43, Andrew Lockley wrote:
>
> This issues I see (briefly) are as follows
> 1) non-natural substance - in contrast of SO2, mimicking volcanoes
> 2) mass flux likely FAR higher per unit of forcing (many orders of
> magnitude)
> 3) deposition would be into ocean - unclear if it floats or sinks. If
> floating, will be eaten by surface animals, and end up covered in
> plankton/algae. If sinking, would end up in sediments, and possibly
> ingested (esp in shallow waters)
> 4) sheer impracticability of distribution in remote and hostile areas
>
> A
>
> On 8 December 2017 at 15:43, lou del bello  wrote:
>
>> Dear all, I am covering this just now (within the next hour or two) for
>> Futurism.com
>> Any comment or suggestion on things to highlight and potential pitfalls
>> of this idea would be greatly appreciated.
>>
>> Best,
>>
>>
>> Lou
>>
>> On 8 December 2017 at 01:19, Renaud de_Richter 
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> *Could this geoengineering venture help save the ice caps? *
>>> https://www.greenbiz.com/article/could-geoengineering-ventur
>>> e-help-save-ice-caps
>>> * By Sue Lebeck *
>>> Wednesday, December 6, 2017
>>>
>>> http://www.ice911.org/el-panamericano/
>>> http://www.ice911.org/testing-1/
>>>
>>>
>>> With hundreds of cities
>>>  and
>>> businesses pledging to bend the curve on carbon emissions by 2020
>>> ,
>>> scientists and researchers are looking into how to buy time against climate
>>> change wherever they can find it. One way is by seeking opportunities to
>>> slow the rapid warming currently underway.
>>>
>>> Leslie Field, founder and CEO of Ice911 , a
>>> Silicon Valley nonprofit research corporation, has been doing just that
>>> .
>>> Field — a micro-electro-mechanical systems and nanotechnology consultant,
>>> Stanford consulting professor and inventor — has been collaborating with
>>> other scientists and engineers to "restore the earth's refrigerator by
>>> slowing down the melt of polar ice," as she explained to me recently. Now,
>>> the organization is seeking ways to scale its idea.
>>>
>>> "After extensive field testing, we have the technology, the team and the
>>> experience to significantly reduce the impacts of climate change by 2020
>>> and give the world time," she said.
>>>
>>> I first met Field in 2013. At the time, Ice911 was still her
>>> "inconvenient hobby," as she liked to call it. "Watching the movie 'An
>>> Inconvenient Truth'
>>>  on a June evening
>>> in Palo Alto changed the path of my life, starting from the moment I walked
>>> out of the theatre," Field reflected. The movie "made it clear that the
>>> Arctic is a key lever for climate change."
>>>
>>> Indeed, the situation in the Arctic has grown even more urgent since
>>> that time. As noted professor of ocean physics Peter Wadhams explained
>>> ,
>>> "The top of the world is turning from white to blue in summer. This
>>> monumental change will amplify global warming and could destabilize the
>>> global climate system."
>>>
>>> After extensive field testing, we have the technology, the team and the
>>> experience to significantly reduce the impacts of climate change by 2020
>>> and 

[geo] First look: Mapping carbon capture projects

[Andrew Lockley]

Sort-of geoengineering - but a pretty good resource

A

   - Amy Harder 
   - Dec 7

First look: Mapping carbon capture projects

Third Way

The centrist think tank Third Way is publishing today
 a new map and
database its creators say is the most comprehensive yet tracking all types
of projects working to capture carbon emissions.

*Why it matters: *The United Nations' scientific body concluded in its most
recent assessment of climate science in 2014
 that
if this technology isn't widely deployed, it would be 138% more expensive
to keep global temperatures below a roughly 2-degree Celsius rise over the
next century.

*Gritty details: *The database identified more than 100 projects, with just
over half of them in the U.S., and most aren't about coal but other
industrial processes, like cement and steel. It also includes the couple of
projects around the world that capture carbon emissions from the air, not
at the onset from facilities like power or industrial plants, which is more
common.

*The big picture: *Carbon capture technology, struggling for decades to
gain political relevancy and commercial scale, is suddenly getting a lot
more attention from people on both the left and right. This database shows
how this once-obscure technology is breaking through and going mainstream
-- mainstream in energy and climate circles, anyway.

*Go deeper:*

   - My recent Harder Line column
   
:
   The world needs clean coal but can't get it
   - Another Axios piece
   
:
   Coal's technology problem and vice versa
   - Quartz is publishing this week an ongoing, in-depth series on this
   technology. Check it all out here
   

   .

-- 
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 post to this group, send email to geoengineering@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[geo] The material that built the modern world is also destroying it. Here’s a fix

[Andrew Lockley]

Thought this was a pretty good article on CO2 -ve cement, so I thought I'd
share it. Helps with the chemistry-challenged, such as myself. But I can't
help think that CCS on 'normal' cement might well work just fine

A
https://qz.com/1123875/the-material-that-built-the-modern-world-is-also-destroying-it-heres-a-fix/
The material that built the modern world is also destroying it. Here’s a fix
[image: tsjisse talsma qz cement 1.3]
The right thing to do. (Tsjisse Talsma for Quartz)
SHARE




WRITTEN BYAkshat Rathi 
December 06, 2017

Piscataway, New Jersey

Remarkably, the material that built the first modern civilization remains
key to building today’s global economy. The cement we use in 2017 is not so
different from the stuff used to build the concrete dome of the Roman
Pantheon in 125 AD.

What has changed is that today we use vastly greater quantities of the grey
powder: more than 4.2 trillion kg annually. To put that in perspective, you
could build 1,000 Hoover Dams each year with the amount of concrete that
much cement would make.

That’d be all well and good except for the fact that 1 kg of cement
releases more than than 0.5 kg of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. As a
result, the cement industry is currently responsible for about 5% of global
CO2 emissions—more than double the aviation industry. Worse still, unlike
the electricity industry, which one day might be comprised
of entirely clean, renewable energy, the chemistry
of conventional cement dictates that the process will continue to produce
huge amounts of carbon dioxide.

Unless, that is, Nicholas DeCristofaro’s plans work out. Since 2008, Solidia
Technologies , where DeCristofaro is chief
technology officer, has been quietly developing a new cement-making process
that produces up to 70% fewer CO2 emissions at a cost that DeCristofaro
claims is on par with or better than conventional cement.

Solidia, which was formed in a bid to commercialize ideas developed at
Rutgers University in New Jersey, is not the first company to attempt to
make environmentally friendly cement. But industry experts say it’s the
most promising yet. Its list of investors—from the world’s largest
cement-maker to one of the globe’s biggest venture capital firms—is proof
of the market’s confidence.
*This article is part of The Race to Zero Emissions
 series investigating carbon-capture technology.
You can also read our feature laying out the case

for
using the technology to fight climate change.*Chemistry of cement

No two batches of cement are 100% chemically identical. In fact, here’s how
the European Standard defines the most widely used type, called “Portland
cement”:

[It] shall consist of at least two-thirds by mass of calcium silicates, the
remainder consisting of aluminium- and iron-containing [compounds]…and
other compounds. The ratio of calcium oxide to silica shall not be less
than two.

You don’t need to be a chemist to realize that even a recipe for the
simplest cake has less room to maneuver. To get “cement,” you can throw any
decent-quality limestone and some clay in a coal-fired kiln. Cement’s
chemical flexibility, along with its high strength, moldability, and the
fact that it’s made of easily accessed raw materials, makes it affordable
and universal.
[image: cement_recipe_004]

Typically, the heat inside the kiln converts limestone, which is calcium
carbonate (CaCO3), to lime, which is calcium oxide (CaO), while releasing
CO2. Then CaO reacts with silica (SiO2) in the clay to form a mixture of
calcium silicates—specifically alite (3CaO.SiO2) and belite (2CaO.SiO2).

To make those ash-grey concrete blocks you’ve seen at construction sites,
cement is mixed with water and gravel to form a solution with porridge-like
consistency. The cement’s role here is to be the glue: combine 10-20%
cement by weight with 80-90% gravel, and it holds together.

Cement-makers may add other ingredients to 

Re: [geo] Could this geoengineering venture help save the ice caps?

[Stephen Salter]

Andrew

Silica is chemically identical to the main constituent of beach sand so 
it is more 'natural' than SO2. It ought to be safe provided that the 
spheres are too big to get into people's lungs and start silicosis.


Hollow spheres will initially float but when colonised by any 
hard-shelled organism will sink.  This can happen to buoys.


We need numbers for weights, transport and dispersion technology to 
reflect solar energy equivalent to the latent heat from ice loss.


Stephen

Emeritus Professor of Engineering Design. School of Engineering, 
University of Edinburgh, Mayfield Road, Edinburgh EH9 3DW, Scotland 
s.sal...@ed.ac.uk, Tel +44 (0)131 650 5704, Cell 07795 203 195, 
WWW.homepages.ed.ac.uk/shs, YouTube Jamie Taylor Power for Change

On 08/12/2017 17:43, Andrew Lockley wrote:

This issues I see (briefly) are as follows
1) non-natural substance - in contrast of SO2, mimicking volcanoes
2) mass flux likely FAR higher per unit of forcing (many orders of 
magnitude)
3) deposition would be into ocean - unclear if it floats or sinks. If 
floating, will be eaten by surface animals, and end up covered in 
plankton/algae. If sinking, would end up in sediments, and possibly 
ingested (esp in shallow waters)

4) sheer impracticability of distribution in remote and hostile areas

A

On 8 December 2017 at 15:43, lou del bello > wrote:


Dear all, I am covering this just now (within the next hour or
two) for Futurism.com 
Any comment or suggestion on things to highlight and potential
pitfalls of this idea would be greatly appreciated.

Best,


Lou

On 8 December 2017 at 01:19, Renaud de_Richter
> wrote:

*Could this geoengineering venture help save the ice caps?

*https://www.greenbiz.com/article/could-geoengineering-venture-help-save-ice-caps


*
BySue Lebeck * 
Wednesday, December 6, 2017

http://www.ice911.org/el-panamericano/

http://www.ice911.org/testing-1/



With hundreds of cities

and businesses pledging to bend the curve on carbon emissions
by 2020

,
scientists and researchers are looking into how to buy time
against climate change wherever they can find it. One way is
by seeking opportunities to slow the rapid warming currently
underway.

Leslie Field, founder and CEO of Ice911
, a Silicon Valley nonprofit research
corporation, has been doing just that

.
Field — a micro-electro-mechanical systems and nanotechnology
consultant, Stanford consulting professor and inventor — has
been collaborating with other scientists and engineers to
"restore the earth's refrigerator by slowing down the melt of
polar ice," as she explained to me recently. Now, the
organization is seeking ways to scale its idea.

"After extensive field testing, we have the technology, the
team and the experience to significantly reduce the impacts of
climate change by 2020 and give the world time," she said.

I first met Field in 2013. At the time, Ice911 was still her
"inconvenient hobby," as she liked to call it. "Watching the
movie 'An Inconvenient Truth'
//on a
June evening in Palo Alto changed the path of my life,
starting from the moment I walked out of the theatre," Field
reflected. The movie "made it clear that the Arctic is a key
lever for climate change."

Indeed, the situation in the Arctic has grown even more urgent
since that time. As noted professor of ocean physics Peter
Wadhams explained

,
"The top of the world is turning from white to blue in summer.
This monumental change will amplify global warming and could
destabilize the global climate system."

After extensive field testing, we have the technology, the
team and the experience to significantly reduce the
impacts of climate change by 2020 and give the world time.

 Field's work started as a research question. "I thought, what
if I consider this a materials problem? What if we 

Re: [geo] Could this geoengineering venture help save the ice caps?

[Andrew Lockley]

This issues I see (briefly) are as follows
1) non-natural substance - in contrast of SO2, mimicking volcanoes
2) mass flux likely FAR higher per unit of forcing (many orders of
magnitude)
3) deposition would be into ocean - unclear if it floats or sinks. If
floating, will be eaten by surface animals, and end up covered in
plankton/algae. If sinking, would end up in sediments, and possibly
ingested (esp in shallow waters)
4) sheer impracticability of distribution in remote and hostile areas

A

On 8 December 2017 at 15:43, lou del bello  wrote:

> Dear all, I am covering this just now (within the next hour or two) for
> Futurism.com
> Any comment or suggestion on things to highlight and potential pitfalls of
> this idea would be greatly appreciated.
>
> Best,
>
>
> Lou
>
> On 8 December 2017 at 01:19, Renaud de_Richter 
> wrote:
>
>>
>> *Could this geoengineering venture help save the ice caps?*
>> https://www.greenbiz.com/article/could-geoengineering-ventur
>> e-help-save-ice-caps
>> *By Sue Lebeck *  Wednesday,
>> December 6, 2017
>>
>> http://www.ice911.org/el-panamericano/
>> http://www.ice911.org/testing-1/
>>
>>
>> With hundreds of cities
>>  and
>> businesses pledging to bend the curve on carbon emissions by 2020
>> ,
>> scientists and researchers are looking into how to buy time against climate
>> change wherever they can find it. One way is by seeking opportunities to
>> slow the rapid warming currently underway.
>>
>> Leslie Field, founder and CEO of Ice911 , a
>> Silicon Valley nonprofit research corporation, has been doing just that
>> .
>> Field — a micro-electro-mechanical systems and nanotechnology consultant,
>> Stanford consulting professor and inventor — has been collaborating with
>> other scientists and engineers to "restore the earth's refrigerator by
>> slowing down the melt of polar ice," as she explained to me recently. Now,
>> the organization is seeking ways to scale its idea.
>>
>> "After extensive field testing, we have the technology, the team and the
>> experience to significantly reduce the impacts of climate change by 2020
>> and give the world time," she said.
>>
>> I first met Field in 2013. At the time, Ice911 was still her
>> "inconvenient hobby," as she liked to call it. "Watching the movie 'An
>> Inconvenient Truth' 
>>  on a June evening in Palo Alto changed the path of my life, starting
>> from the moment I walked out of the theatre," Field reflected. The movie
>> "made it clear that the Arctic is a key lever for climate change."
>>
>> Indeed, the situation in the Arctic has grown even more urgent since that
>> time. As noted professor of ocean physics Peter Wadhams explained
>> ,
>> "The top of the world is turning from white to blue in summer. This
>> monumental change will amplify global warming and could destabilize the
>> global climate system."
>>
>> After extensive field testing, we have the technology, the team and the
>> experience to significantly reduce the impacts of climate change by 2020
>> and give the world time.
>>
>>  Field's work started as a research question. "I thought, what if I
>> consider this a materials problem? What if we can replace the lost
>> reflectivity of the ice with a safe reflective material?"
>>
>> When I first wrote about Ice911's work three years ago, I was impressed
>> by the enormity of the task that one woman and her colleagues were willing
>> to take on — and by the enormity of the potential impact if they succeed.
>> This moved me to learn more about this planet-saving mission in engineering
>> and materials science.
>>
>> Since that time, Ice911 has become Field’s professional focus. Her
>> growing team has tested and refined its methods for "rebuilding the
>> multi-year reflective 'bright ice' in the Arctic." In March, they began
>> working with Climformatics , a California
>> startup specializing in climate modeling, to create a large-scale
>> deployment plan.
>>
>>
>> Softening the hard edges of geoengineering
>>
>> Ice911's science-savvy website explains the risky business of polar ice
>> melt to non-scientists: "The more ice melts, the more radiation is absorbed
>> by larger areas of open ocean; then the more the ocean heats, and the more
>> the ice melts." That creates what climate scientists call a positive
>> feedback loop, but one with a very negative effect.
>>
>> As a result, the Arctic and its icecap, which we rely on to moderate the
>> climate, is warming twice as fast as the rest of the 

Re: [geo] Could this geoengineering venture help save the ice caps?

[lou del bello]

Dear all, I am covering this just now (within the next hour or two) for
Futurism.com
Any comment or suggestion on things to highlight and potential pitfalls of
this idea would be greatly appreciated.

Best,


Lou

On 8 December 2017 at 01:19, Renaud de_Richter  wrote:

>
> *Could this geoengineering venture help save the ice caps?*
> https://www.greenbiz.com/article/could-geoengineering-
> venture-help-save-ice-caps
> *By Sue Lebeck *  Wednesday,
> December 6, 2017
>
> http://www.ice911.org/el-panamericano/
> http://www.ice911.org/testing-1/
>
>
> With hundreds of cities
>  and
> businesses pledging to bend the curve on carbon emissions by 2020
> ,
> scientists and researchers are looking into how to buy time against climate
> change wherever they can find it. One way is by seeking opportunities to
> slow the rapid warming currently underway.
>
> Leslie Field, founder and CEO of Ice911 , a
> Silicon Valley nonprofit research corporation, has been doing just that
> .
> Field — a micro-electro-mechanical systems and nanotechnology consultant,
> Stanford consulting professor and inventor — has been collaborating with
> other scientists and engineers to "restore the earth's refrigerator by
> slowing down the melt of polar ice," as she explained to me recently. Now,
> the organization is seeking ways to scale its idea.
>
> "After extensive field testing, we have the technology, the team and the
> experience to significantly reduce the impacts of climate change by 2020
> and give the world time," she said.
>
> I first met Field in 2013. At the time, Ice911 was still her "inconvenient
> hobby," as she liked to call it. "Watching the movie 'An Inconvenient
> Truth'  on a June
> evening in Palo Alto changed the path of my life, starting from the moment
> I walked out of the theatre," Field reflected. The movie "made it clear
> that the Arctic is a key lever for climate change."
>
> Indeed, the situation in the Arctic has grown even more urgent since that
> time. As noted professor of ocean physics Peter Wadhams explained
> ,
> "The top of the world is turning from white to blue in summer. This
> monumental change will amplify global warming and could destabilize the
> global climate system."
>
> After extensive field testing, we have the technology, the team and the
> experience to significantly reduce the impacts of climate change by 2020
> and give the world time.
>
>  Field's work started as a research question. "I thought, what if I
> consider this a materials problem? What if we can replace the lost
> reflectivity of the ice with a safe reflective material?"
>
> When I first wrote about Ice911's work three years ago, I was impressed by
> the enormity of the task that one woman and her colleagues were willing to
> take on — and by the enormity of the potential impact if they succeed. This
> moved me to learn more about this planet-saving mission in engineering and
> materials science.
>
> Since that time, Ice911 has become Field’s professional focus. Her growing
> team has tested and refined its methods for "rebuilding the multi-year
> reflective 'bright ice' in the Arctic." In March, they began working with
> Climformatics , a California startup
> specializing in climate modeling, to create a large-scale deployment plan.
>
>
> Softening the hard edges of geoengineering
>
> Ice911's science-savvy website explains the risky business of polar ice
> melt to non-scientists: "The more ice melts, the more radiation is absorbed
> by larger areas of open ocean; then the more the ocean heats, and the more
> the ice melts." That creates what climate scientists call a positive
> feedback loop, but one with a very negative effect.
>
> As a result, the Arctic and its icecap, which we rely on to moderate the
> climate, is warming twice as fast as the rest of the world. And an ice-free
> Arctic has serious consequences for global temperature rise and weather
> patterns.
>
> To address this, Ice911 has been developing geoengineering methods to slow
> the melt. Geoengineering approaches are typically expensive, rapid,
> irreversible and have unintended ecological effects. Ice911 applies a
> softer touch.
>
> Its so-called "soft" geoengineering processes are intended to be
> reversible or removable, and make as small and local an ecological impact
> as possible. As part of its "soft" solution, Ice911 uses ice-building
> materials that are "safe, low-cost, scalable and reversible." The
> materials