5 last-ditch schemes to prevent global warming disaster (Re-Issue)

Washington, September 6 (ANI): A new study by the United Kingdom’s Royal Society has outlined five last-ditch schemes needed to prevent a global warming disaster.

According to National Geographic News, United Kingdom’s Royal Society’s report is the first from a major scientific body devoted to ranking the various proposals for “geoengineering.”

“It is an unpalatable truth that unless we can succeed in greatly reducing (greenhouse gas) emissions, we are headed for a very uncomfortable and challenging climate future,” said study leader John Shepherd, an earth scientist at the University of Southampton in England, in a statement.

Should that future arrive, the society reluctantly recommends seriously considering the following five global-cooling ideas.

Volcanic eruptions can quickly cool the planet by spewing tiny droplets containing sulfur dioxide into the atmosphere, where they reflect some of the sun’s rays back into space.

Researchers have proposed fighting global warming with their own “flying volcanoes”-jets or balloons that release similar droplets.

Millions of tons of these droplets would need to be sent into the air every year to cancel out current global warming, at a cost of tens of billions of US dollars, the report estimates.

Even so, the flying volcanoes would be one of the most cost-effective types of geoengineering.

Another idea is the use of computer-controlled ships that could ply the remote seas, pumping out seawater mist, which would encourage low, thick clouds to form. The clouds would reflect sunlight back into space.

It would cost more than a billion dollars to launch a fleet of a few hundred of these ships, according to the new study, a relatively small sum, as geoengineering costs go.

Scientists also propose to put huge mirrors or thin, reflective disks in orbit alongside Earth and block solar rays.

The approaches would be safe, with little in the way of side effects, according to the Royal Society.

The study also determined that since trees pull huge amounts of carbon dioxide (CO2) out of the air, planting more forests would be one of the most cost-effective ways of getting the gas out of the air. nother proposal to prevent a global warming disaster is dissolving mountains of rock, which would speed up the natural process of rock weathering, as a way of absorbing CO2.

A big operation for artificial rock weathering would need big mines, and a lot of electricity to chemically split seawater to make an acid that would be sprayed over the rocks. (ANI)

5 last-ditch schemes to prevent global warming disaster

Washington, September 5 (ANI): A new study by the United Kingdom’s Royal Society has outlined five last-ditch schemes needed to prevent a global warming disaster.

According to National Geographic News, United Kingdom’s Royal Society’s report is the first from a major scientific body devoted to ranking the various proposals for “geoengineering.”

“It is an unpalatable truth that unless we can succeed in greatly reducing (greenhouse gas) emissions, we are headed for a very uncomfortable and challenging climate future,” said study leader John Shepherd, an earth scientist at the University of Southampton in England, in a statement.

Should that future arrive, the society reluctantly recommends seriously considering the following five global-cooling ideas.

Volcanic eruptions can quickly cool the planet by spewing tiny droplets containing sulfur dioxide into the atmosphere, where they reflect some of the sun’s rays back into space.

Researchers have proposed fighting global warming with their own “flying volcanoes”-jets or balloons that release similar droplets.

Millions of tons of these droplets would need to be sent into the air every year to cancel out current global warming, at a cost of tens of billions of US dollars, the report estimates.

Even so, the flying volcanoes would be one of the most cost-effective types of geoengineering.

Another idea is the use of computer-controlled ships that could ply the remote seas, pumping out seawater mist, which would encourage low, thick clouds to form. The clouds would reflect sunlight back into space.

It would cost more than a billion dollars to launch a fleet of a few hundred of these ships, according to the new study, a relatively small sum, as geoengineering costs go.

Scientists also propose to put huge mirrors or thin, reflective disks in orbit alongside Earth and block solar rays.

The approaches would be safe, with little in the way of side effects, according to the Royal Society.

The study also determined that since trees pull huge amounts of carbon dioxide (CO2) out of the air, planting more forests would be one of the most cost-effective ways of getting the gas out of the air.

Another proposal to prevent a global warming disaster is dissolving mountains of rock, which would speed up the natural process of rock weathering, as a way of absorbing CO2.

A big operation for artificial rock weathering would need big mines, and a lot of electricity to chemically split seawater to make an acid that would be sprayed over the rocks. (ANI)

Risky climate-fixing methods needed unless CO2 emissions are greatly reduced

Sydney, Sept 2 (ANI): Scientists have warned that potentially dangerous and unproven geoengineering technologies might be needed to fix the climate in the near future, unless emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) can be greatly reduced.

According to a report by ABC News, the stark warning, made by scientists in a report by the Royal Society, UK, determined that geoengineering is no quick fix, but may be needed to head off planetary catastrophe and deserves more research.

Royal Society president Professor Martin Rees said that growing interest in geoengineering was partly motivated by a “false hope of a quick fix”.

“But if such reductions achieve too little too late there will be surely pressure to contemplate a plan B,” he said.

Britain’s chief scientific adviser Professor John Beddington supports the report’s recommendations, which call for more research into geoengineering.

The report divides geoengineering technologies into two groups; those that remove the greenhouse gas CO2 from the atmosphere, and those which reflect sunlight back into space.

It says such technologies are currently limited to the laboratory and calls for a 10-year, 100 million pound research program – a 10-fold increase.

The report supports steps to remove CO2 from the air above others, because they addressed the underlying problem of too many heat-trapping gases, and so were more predictable and would fight not only climate change but also acidifying oceans.

In the event of an emergency where the earth suddenly pitched into a different, hotter climate, the world may need to reflect back some sunlight, according to the report.

One method may be shooting highly reflective aerosols into the atmosphere.

But the report warns that it could introduce a new influence on the earth’s climate that is less predictable.

“You could actually seriously and adversely impact one of the most critical weather patterns on the planet,” said lead author Professor John Shepherd.

In response to the report Professor John Buckeridge of RMIT University in Melbourne said that the focus should be on changing human behaviour, not geoengineering.

“Geoengineering has the potential to reap even greater havoc,” he said.

According to Diana Bronson, spokesperson for Environmental watchdog ETC Group, “Governments will throw precious time and dollars at sci-fi fantasies, overlook potentially devastating side effects and divert their attention from the urgent need to reduce carbon emissions at source.”

“What must be immediately implemented are systems to reduce the rampant consumption of natural resources, and the resultant pollution that our ever-growing population is responsible for,” said Buckeridge. (ANI)

Geoengineering could prove to be weapon to combat global warming in future

Washington, Jan 28 (ANI): If scientists have their way, geoengineering could well be the future weapon to combat global warming and cool the climate.

This is the conclusion of a the first comprehensive assessment of the climate cooling potential of different geoengineering schemes carried out by researchers at the University of East Anglia (UEA).

The key findings of the assessment are:

Enhancing carbon sinks could bring CO2 back to its pre-industrial level, but not before 2100 – and only when combined with strong mitigation of CO2 emissions.

Stratospheric aerosol injections and sunshades in space have by far the greatest potential to cool the climate by 2050 – but also carry the greatest risk.

Surprisingly, existing activities that add phosphorous to the ocean may have greater long-term carbon sequestration potential than deliberately adding iron or nitrogen.

On land, sequestering carbon in new forests and as ‘bio-char’ (charcoal added back to the soil) have greater short-term cooling potential than ocean fertilization.

Increasing the reflectivity of urban areas could reduce urban heat islands, but will have minimal global effect.

Other globally ineffective schemes include ocean pipes and stimulating biologically-driven increases in cloud reflectivity.

“The realisation that existing efforts to mitigate the effects of human-induced climate change are proving wholly ineffectual has fuelled a resurgence of interest in geo-engineering,” said lead author Professor Tim Lenton of UEA’s School of Environmental Sciences.

“This paper provides the first extensive evaluation of their relative merits in terms of their climate cooling potential and should help inform the prioritisation of future research,” he added.

Geo-engineering is the large-scale engineering of the environment to combat the effects of climate change – in particular to counteract the effects of increased CO2 in the atmosphere.

A number of schemes have been suggested including nutrient fertilization of the oceans, cloud seeding, sunshades in space, stratospheric aerosol injections, and ocean pipes.

“We found that some geoengineering options could usefully complement mitigation, and together they could cool the climate, but geoengineering alone cannot solve the climate problem,” said Professor Lenton.

Injections into the stratosphere of sulphate or other manufactured particles have the greatest potential to cool the climate back to pre-industrial temperatures by 2050. (ANI)

World needs emergency backup plan to stabilize climate

Washington, Nov 8 : A scientist has said that while steep cuts in carbon emissions are essential to stabilizing global climate, the world also needs an emergency backup plan.

The scientist in question is Ken Caldeira of the Carnegie Institution in the US.

“We need a climate engineering research and development plan, in addition to strong measures to reduce greenhouse gas emissions,” said Caldeira.

“Prudence demands that we consider what we might do in the face of unacceptable climate damage, which could occur despite our best efforts to rein in greenhouse gas emissions,” he added.

Caldeira has urged that research into the pros and cons of techniques like geoengineering be made a high priority if global warming is to be controlled.

Geoengineering, or climate engineering, refers to controversial proposals to deliberately modify the Earth’s environment on a large scale, primarily to counteract greenhouse warming.

One scheme would cool the planet by injecting dust into the upper atmosphere to scatter incoming sunlight. Other possibilities include enhancing cloud cover over the oceans.

Though geoengineering solutions such as injecting dust into the atmosphere are risky, they may become necessary if emissions cuts are insufficient to stave off catastrophic warming.

Critics question the effectiveness of these schemes and worry that tampering with the Earth’s systems would create as many problems as they solve.

But, others warn that currently accelerating carbon emissions may push the planet’s climate system to a tipping point, making drastic measures necessary to prevent an environmental calamity.

“Science is needed to address critical questions, among them: How effective would various climate engineering proposals be at achieving their climate goals? What unintended outcomes might result? How might these unintended outcomes affect both human and natural systems?” said Caldeira.

“Engineering is needed both to build deployable systems and to keep the science focused on what’s technically feasible,” he added.

According to Caldeira, “A climate engineering research plan should be built around important questions rather than preconceived answers.”

“It should anticipate and embrace innovation and recognize that a portfolio of divergent but defensible paths is most likely to reveal a successful path forward,” he added. (ANI)