Experimental:
"What’s the Least Bad Way to Cool the Planet?"
New York Times
To cool the planet in this century, humans must either remove carbon from the air or use solar geoengineering,
a temporary measure that may reduce peak temperatures, extreme storms and other climatic changes. Humans might make the planet Earth more reflective by adding tiny sulfuric acid droplets to the stratosphere from aircraft, whitening low-level clouds over the ocean by spraying sea salt into the air or by other
interventions.
Yes, this is what it comes down to: carbon removal or solar geoengineering or both. At least one of them is required to cool the planet this century. There are no other options.
Carbon removal would no doubt trounce geoengineering in a straw poll of climate experts. Removal is riding a wave of support among centrist environmental groups, governments and industry. Solar geoengineering is seen as such a desperate gamble that it was
dropped from the important “summary for policymakers” in the United Nations’ latest climate report.
Yet if I were asked which method could cut midcentury temperatures with the least environmental risk, I would say geoengineering.
Lest you dismiss me,
I founded
Carbon Engineering, one of the most visible companies developing technology to capture carbon directly from the air and then pump it underground or use it to make products that contain carbon dioxide. The company’s interests
could be hurt if geoengineering were seen as an acceptable option. I was also an early proponent for burning biofuels like wood waste, capturing the resulting carbon at the smokestack and storing it underground. I am proud to be a part of the community developing carbon removal. These approaches can help manage hard-to-abate emissions, and they are the only way to reduce the long-term climate risks that will remain when net emissions reach zero.
But the problem with these carbon removal technologies is that they are inherently slow because the carbon that has accumulated in the atmosphere since the Industrial Revolution must be removed ton by ton. Still, the technology provides a long-term cure.
Geoengineering, on the other hand, is cheap and acts fast, but it cannot deflate the carbon bubble. It is a Band-Aid, not a cure.
The trade-off between geoengineering and carbon removal depends on one’s time horizon. The sooner cooling is pursued, the greater the environmental and social impacts of carbon removal.
Suppose emissions were under control and you wanted to cool the planet an additional degree by midcentury. How would removal and geoengineering compare?
Carbon removal could work. But it will require an enormous industry. Trees are touted as a natural climate solution, and there are some opportunities to protect natural systems while capturing carbon by allowing deforested landscapes to regrow and pull in carbon dioxide as they do. But cooling this fast cannot be achieved by letting nature run free. Ecosystems would need to be manipulated using irrigation, fire suppression or genetically modified plants whose roots are resistant to rot. This helps to increase the buildup of carbon in soils. To cool a degree by midcentury, this ecological engineering would need to happen at a scale comparable to that of global agriculture or forestry, causing profound disruption of natural ecosystems and the too-often-marginalized people who depend on them.
Industrial removal methods have a much smaller land footprint; a single carbon capture facility occupying a square mile of land could remove a million tons of carbon from the air a year. But building and running this equipment would require energy, steel and cement from a global supply chain. And
removing the few hundred billion tons required to cool a degree by midcentury requires a supply chain that might be smaller than what feeds the construction industry but larger than what supports the global mining industry.
The challenge is that a carbon removal operation — industrial or biological — achieves nothing the day it starts, but only cumulatively, year upon year. So, the faster one seeks that one degree of cooling, the faster one must build the removal industry, and the higher the social costs and environmental impacts per degree of cooling.
Geoengineering could also work. The physical scale of intervention is — in some respects — small. Less than two million tons of sulfur per year injected into the stratosphere from a fleet of about a hundred high-flying aircraft would reflect away sunlight and cool the planet by a degree. The sulfur falls out of the stratosphere in about two years, so cooling is inherently short term and could be adjusted based on political decisions about risk and benefit. NYT:
archive
Stop telling kids that climate change will destroy their world
Some “climate anxiety” is the product of telling kids — falsely — that they have no future. www.vox.com/...
Climate change is all about power. You have more than you think.
Think less like a consumer and more like an activist.
www.vox.com/…
Britain's first wetland 'super reserve' offers boost to nature-based solutions to climate change
theconversation.com/…
The world's carbon dioxide battery is here and needs only steel and water
And it is 50% cheaper than lithium-based batteries
interestingengineering.com/…
.
Vacuuming carbon from the air could help stop climate change. Not everyone agrees
https://www.npr.org/…
Slag heaps from steelmaking could absorb CO2 and fight climate change
Around 180 million tonnes of slag is buried in heaps around the UK, and researchers are investigating whether it could be used to remove carbon dioxide Read more: https://www.newscientist.com/article/2322641-slag-heaps-from-steelmaking
We can grow the economy, strengthen security — and reduce emissions
https://thehill.com/…
Monarch butterfly populations are thriving in North America
news.uga.edu/...
Climate crisis
How satellites may hold the key to the methane crisis
A new generation of detectors will be many times better at tracking discharges of the dangerous greenhouse gas
https://amp.theguardian.com/
Environment
Study finds that past global photosynthesis reacted quickly to more carbon in the air
by University of Copenhagen
https://phys.org/…
The 'world’s largest' solar power+storage project will displace 1.4M tons of coal
It'll have 3,500 megawatts of solar panels
interestingengineering
Will high gas prices supercharge electric vehicle sales?
Mar 2, 2022 — Electric vehicle sales have been rising for several years, and the pace is picking up as gas prices climb. In 2019, just 3 percent of U.S.
https://www.google.com/…
Making significant, near-term methane emissions cuts in tandem with slashing carbon emissions would dramatically improve the odds that Arctic sea ice could survive during the summertime through 2100, a new study finds.
https://www.axios.com/…
The Arctic Revolution That’s Changing Climate Science
Inuit groups spent decades hosting researchers from far away to study the ice and animals. Now they’re taking up the tools and reshaping the science
https://www.bloomberg.com/..
Restoration of forest cover can curtail the climate crisis and provide many co-benefits, or waste limited resources. To use restoration of forest cover to its highest potential, global dynamic monitoring is needed that combines existing restoration projects with control plots and remote-sensing technologies.
https://www.nature.com/…
We can eat our way out of climate change.
New innovations in agriculture could be one of the most potent carbon-reversal opportunities.
https://www.bostonglobe.com
A Bold Idea to Stall the Climate Crisis—by Building Better Trees
Changing the genetic makeup of trees could supercharge their ability to suck up carbon dioxide. But are forests of frankentrees really a good idea?
https://www.wired.com/...
Melting ice caps may not shut down ocean current
Most simulations of our climate's future may be overly sensitive to Arctic ice melt as a cause of abrupt changes in ocean circulation, according to new research led by scientists at the University of Wisconsin–Madison
https://phys.org/...
Extinction Rebellion
XR protesters shut down central London bridges including Westminster
Activists close some of the largest routes through capital in protest at continued use of fossil fuels
Several central London bridges, including Waterloo, Blackfriars and Westminster, have been shut down by protesting Extinction Rebellion activists.
https://www.theguardian.com/
Boris Johnson appears to take sideswipe at Tory climate policy sceptics
PM hits out at ‘prejudice’ against environmental agenda as he rejects idea of ending green levies on bills
https://www.theguardian.com/
How worried should we really be about ‘insectageddon’?
Although most researchers are worried about insect decline, we should be wary of the hyperbole of impending Doom.
🌎
(Help save the planet):
*Turn out the lights *Don't waste water *Avoid creating nighttime light pollution *Avoid burning wood (or other things), as wood fires are both pollutant and carcinogenic *Don't use harmful pesticides *Limit your use of cars and planes (if possible) *Don't use gas powered vehicles *Take out grass and put in a garden or pond (or xeriscape ) *Mow, blow, and whack with electric *Plant for the animals (bees, birds etc) *Plant a tree *Don't micro manage yards, go wilder *Try to use solar *Take a trolley or train *Use energy efficient products or products that work on clean fuels *Reduce dependence on non-biodegradable items* Walk or carpool *Turn down the heat or AC *Reuse items- give to Goodwill or Craig's list rather than dumping *Ride bikes instead of using cars *Cut down or cease eating meat *Use reusable carry bags for groceries not their plastic; second choice, paper bags *Compost *Save the bees *Be an insect friend *Be informed *Write your representative *Elect pro-environment candidates and demand action *Support the Green New Deal *Sign petitions *Get involved *March *Blog about the environment *control population*
Earth Matters
with Meteor Blades
Earth Matters with Meteor Blades
* The Thursday scheduled Climate Brief posts will be on hiatus until Autumn. Thanks for reading *