Scientists Decide to Consider Considering Geo-engineering
by Jeremy Elton Jacquot, Los Angeles on 11.12.07
Image courtesy of B. Matthews
In a worrying sign that scientists may be slowly succumbing to the siren song of geo-engineering, a panel of top climate researchers cautiously endorsed a proposal to fund more research looking into unorthodox ways to stop global warming. While no formal statement was released, Phil Rasch, a modeler with Boulder's University Corporation for Atmospheric Research and a member of the panel, spoke for the great majority of his colleagues when he stated: "We're not saying that there should be geoengineering, we're saying there should be research regarding geoengineering."
Even once vehement opponents of such schemes - the best-known of which would consist of pumping aerosols into the stratosphere to mimic a volcano's cooling effect - said that they were slowly warming to the idea. In light of the gravity of current conditions, Daniel Schrag of Harvard University and David Keith of the University of Calgary argued that the controversial field deserved further scrutiny.
Claiming that countries would inevitably turn to such strategies once conditions depreciated enough, Schrag suggested that more research now would prevent the most drastic potential consequences from occurring. "We're going to be doing this if we're afraid of something really bad happening, like the Greenland ice sheet collapsing," he explained.
Raymond Pierrehumberg, a contributor to RealClimate, called for a 10-year moratorium on any geo-engineering plan, cautioning his colleagues that further research should only serve as a supplement to efforts aimed at slashing greenhouse gas emissions. Let's hope cooler heads prevail.
Via ::ScienceNOW: Giving Climate Change a Kick (news website)
See also: ::Sounds Risky to Us: Simulating a Volcanic Eruption to Counter Global Warming, ::The Economist Discovers Geo-engineering, ::Wild and Crazy Ideas to Cool the Planet
Thirsty for more? Check out these related articles:
- Ocean's 'Poop Machines' Could Help Fight Climate Change
- Royal Society Launches Large-Scale Review of Geoengineering Proposals
- British Scientists Launch Climate Change Monitoring Robot Gliders in Atlantic Ocean
- Emissions from Soil Organic Carbon Not as Bad as Previously Thought
Greenwash Watch: Builders Write Their Own Green Building Standard
|
Report: Cleaner Air for Delhi Still Long Way Off
|
Most of these people talking about massive scale engineering projects will be scientists with no experience in materials handling, ballistic missiles, etc. It'll take military engineering types to come up with realistic cost estimates. When we know there is serious intent to proceed is when the military industrial complex smells money and gets its hooks into Congress.
The exception to the above generalization is in iron seeding of the high seas, which is more reliant on marine biology and more analogous to aquaculture than military engineering.
I think the proper metaphor for earth manipulation is the emergency room (ER) protocol of "stabilizing the patient". Earth needs stabilization while we get going on conservation and renewable energy. If you can accept that metaphor, the only valid question becomes "which technique is most cost effective and has the fewest side effects on the patient."
Iron seeding, in my opinion, holds the highest promise to stabilize the patient but I am absolutely terrified of the prospects of a major aerospace corporation or oil exploration services company getting funded by Congress to try some of these more "out there" techniques.
We should consider the possibility that without something like this, we are doomed to a future of runaway global warming. Maybe as wacky and disturbing as massive geo-engineering is, it is the only way out.
I'd love for everyone to put 4 solar panels and 2 wind turbines on their house, cover deserts with more solar panels, windy places with more turbines, and start massive algae farms for all car fuel, but what if they don't?
Then what? Do we watch the eco-system collapse and say "I told you so?"
How about the simplest, greenest, most natural form of geo engineering? Plant a billion trees and let them do the work.
Chris,
Sounds good, but I've seen a few times now that planting trees in northern latitudes does not help global warming. (see here) http://www.treehugger.com/files/2006/12/planting_trees.php
Maybe saving and replanting the rainforest should be a number 1 priority, but is it enough? This question is a pretty important one.
As long as there is anything else that people can do, we should avoid the Hail Mary.
Ecosystems are complex. Saying "I know! We'll just dump a trillion tons of dry ice on the desert" is some really twentieth-century thinking.
taking this issue into human hands is ridiculous and quite arrogant. We have gotten so much soo wrong up to this point its madness to think that we know enough about our planet to start doing such drastic things thinking that we can artificially alter our situation to get out of it.
There is only one solution, human population control along with strict government rule. Anyone remember DDT? "yeah its safe enough to spray on your kids!"...
sorry but like Einstein said "you cant solve problems using the same level of thinking that created them"
Alex said: "There is only one solution, human population control along with strict government rule."
Not looking forward to the totalitarian state in which your neighbours will turn you in for leaving on a light bulb and only the most worthy can have children.
I've read numerous articles about being beyond the tipping point; irreversible climate change etc. And still there is no sign of the international consensus for the drastic cut backs required to even stabilise the situation, so, I say, if we got ourselves into this mess we can get ourselves out of it, hopefully without resorting to death camps.
If we are going to be on this planet for any serious length of time we are going to have to learn how to control the climate. I know this grates with some peoples ideas of harmony, but there are allot of us and we aren't particularly harmonious by nature.