Archive for the 'Geoengineering' category
In one of the most comprehensive articles yet on geoengineering, the Economist balances the need, and the drawbacks of research into geoegineering.
Brian Launder of the University of Manchester, who edited the Royal Society papers, argues that the sort of geo-engineering schemes they describe might buy the world 20 to 30 years to adjust. That breathing space would be useful if something really bad, such as the collapse into the sea of part of the Greenland ice-shelf, was in imminent danger of happening, and the realisation of the danger led to a political agreement that climate change had to be stopped rapidly.
So what now? The answer is probably to carry out preliminary trials [of ocean iron fertilization] proposed by Dr Smetacek and Dr Naqvi. Correctly done, they should help to indicate what could work, what would not, and what the financial and environmental costs might be.
Link to article
Categories: Geoengineering, Ocean Fertilization
No Comments »
The Economist discusses the pros and cons of geogineering, and suggests that research is necessary just in case,
The solution to climate change will probably involve an array of technologies, from renewables, nuclear, carbon sequestration, public transport to energy conservation. It is too early to say whether geo-engineering or anything else will be part of this mix. Geo-engineering may turn out to be too risky, however much is spent on researching it. Then again, there may come a time when it is needed. The world needs to be ready—and research is the only way to prepare.
Link to article
Categories: Geoengineering
No Comments »
The Guardian has this piece on the role of geoengineering to prevent potential runaway feedbacks in the Earth’s climate system. The article talks about the vital need for reducing GHG emissions worldwide, and then writes,
But even if we do all the above [emissions reductions], can we be sure of preventing climate catastrophe? No. The Earth’s climate system is characterised by feedback loops which can amplify even a small initial perturbation. And it seems that following an initial post-industrial warming of 0.8C, one major positive feedback process is already well under way, in the Arctic.
Geo-engineering should be developed strictly as a firefighting capability to maintain long-term climatic stability, not as a substitute for all the other actions we should be taking.
Link to article
Categories: Geoengineering
No Comments »
Shell Oil has funded a proposal by Cquestrate to investigate atmospheric carbon removal by adding lime to sea water. This process is heavily energy intensive, but could still be cost-effective near oil fields that have un-utilized natural gas resources. Instead of flaring the gas, it could be harnessed to create lime from limestone. Notably, the company developing this proccess plans to use an “Open Source” development process so that anyone can use the technology.
Read a Wired article on the process.
Read about the open source methodology, and visit the company’s website.
Categories: Geoengineering
No Comments »
The Christian Science Monitor published this article, “Can we engineer a cooler Earth?“, which discusses the need for geoengineering as a stop-gap approach until the world can implement meaningful CO2 emissions cuts. Also mentioned is the need to begin researching how geoengineering could be conducted responsibly.
Categories: Geoengineering
No Comments »
Additional detail via ScienceNews regarding the statement yesterday by 13 National Academies of Science on the call for additional research into Geoengineering:
The new statement also argues that research could point the way towards developing a stable climate via such things as reforestation and “geoengineering technologies.” Such measures “would complement our greenhouse gas reduction strategies,” it said.
The document didn’t spell out what those geoengineering measures might be, so I asked for clarification from Michael Clegg, Foreign Secretary of the NAS, here in Washington.
“These are essentially engineering approaches to soaking up carbon dioxide,” he explains. “One suggestion that has been made in the past, for example, is the so-called fertilization of the oceans with iron. But none of this has been looked at very carefully from a scientific perspective,” he notes. “So what the statement commits is to organize a conference to look more carefully at some of these possibilities to see whether they’re plausible – whether any of them offer solutions.”
Such a conference could occur within the next 18 months, Clegg says, although he adds that no actual dates have been discussed.
Categories: Geoengineering, Ocean Fertilization
No Comments »
In a joint statement, 13 National Scientific Academies (including those from the G8 as well as China, India, Brazil, Mexico, and South Africa) have called for “prompt action to deal with the causes of climate change” via both mitigation and adaptation. The document also calls for research on:
“… approaches which may contribute towards maintaining a stable climate (including so-called geoengineering technologies and reforestation), which would complement our greenhouse gas reduction strategies. The G8+5 academies intend to organise a conference to discuss these technologies.”
Andy Revkin at the times covers it here.
Categories: Geoengineering
No Comments »
|
