Geoengineering and Cirrus Clouds

The picture on the left is of cirrus clouds - The beautiful, feathery, high altitude clouds we all know and love.

Unfortunately, the more of them there are, the warmer the planet. This is because they're actually made of tiny ice crystals which trap heat in the atmosphere.

They're not the root cause of the climate change (that would be CO2) but it's been realised that, by dispersing enough of them, we could balance out all the warming effect we've had so far....

It was David Mitchell of the Reno Desert Research Institute that suggested the original cloud-busting idea back in 2009. Now Trudo Storelvmo and his team from Yale University have used climate modelling to test the idea. By adding powdered bismuth triiodide into the layer of the atmosphere where cirrus form, it greatly reduced their occurrence. Done on a global scale it would wipe out the 0.8 degrees C of man-made warming made so far.

Unfortunately, if you get the concentration wrong (always possible in something as dynamic and complex as the real atmosphere), it would have the opposite effect. Not good.

Even if we did understand enough about the atmosphere to safely achieve the effect we wanted safely: a) We'd have to continue doing it year after year; b) It wouldn't make climate change go away. It would just continue building (as CO2 levels keep increasing) until our efforts we're cancelled out; c) Ocean acidification, which could have disastrous effects on marine life, would continue to increase unabated.

So much for that idea then.

[Source: New Scientist 26th Jan 2013]

Climate Engineering Tests Put On Hold

More commonly known as geoengineering, climate engineering is the 'science' of trying to manipulate the climate to reverse global warming. In an earlier blog, I said that I was against it. And I still am.

One of the many geoengineering ideas put forward is to cool the planet down by injecting sulphates into the stratosphere. It's thought that this would have a similar effect to large volcanic eruptions, which are known to have a temporary cooling effect on the world. You can read more about the theory here.

The reason I mention it is that, until a few days ago, a UK project was about to start testing the feasibility of this so-called stratospheric particle injection. This month they wanted to send a balloon up to a height of 1000 metres with a hose attached to it and spray water into the atmosphere. Sounds a bit basic but that's the appeal of this technique: It's low tech, cheap, and quick.

How about that? All our climate change problems solved for next to nothing. Almost too good to be true.

In fact, the project has been put on hold whilst they "consult stakeholders". Presumably because objections have been raised about the wisdom of the technique.

You see, there are a number of problems with it:

a) It does nothing about the underlying problem of carbon emissions. In fact, once they've started putting sulphates into the stratosphere, interest in cutting CO2 is likely to wither away. Which will mean that we will be forced to continue with sulphates for centuries because, as soon we stop, the climate will start warming again. Cooling the planet only solves one of the problems of CO2. For example, with CO2 still in our atmosphere ocean acidification will continue killing off our seas.

b) Once you put the sulphates up there, you have no control of where they go and what effect they will have. They may cause climatic disruption e.g. They may cause monsoons to fail in Africa and Asia. They could also contribute to ozone depletion. And, exactly how much do you put up there? How much, for example, will lower the average world temperature by 0.5C? The Earth's atmosphere is a complex, dynamic system that we're still struggling to understand, so it'll have to be guesswork. Do you feel comfortable with that?

c) Nobody knows what the long term effects of sulphate injection will be. It may mess with ecosystems, it may have unknown effects on plant-life, on us even. It's just one big experiment.

More here.

My Environmental Wish List

Here's a list of things I'd like to see happen over the next few years: 

1) A new, legally binding climate change treaty to be agreed by all nations. Not some useless, vaguely worded, cosey little agreement like the Copenhagen Accord, but something with targets, deadlines, and teeth if countries start back-sliding.

The next chance to do just this will be in Mexico later this year. The U.S. could make or break it. Sadly it's unlikely they'll get a bill through in time for the President to make the promises he wants.

2) Solar technology to advance to the point where solar panels and heaters are so cheap that almost any home or third world village can afford one.

3) All forms of renewable energy to advance to a point where they can out-compete fossil fuels economically.

4) Batteries for electric cars to become a lot cheaper, more compact, and more efficient (Currently, when the batteries die after several years, you face a bill of thousands to replace them; They also limit the range of electric cars between charges).

5) Governments across the world to work with car manufacturers to establish the infrastructure required on a national basis to encourage the rapid take up of fuel cell and electric cars (i.e. Make refuelling stations available everywhere, not just in cities like London).

6) The U.N. to set-up a research lab with the specific aim of advancing all forms of renewable energy to the point where 2) to 4) above are possible. The lab would employ all the best minds available in the required fields.


7) Someone to come up with 'killer' climate change evidence. Something so undeniable, yet straightforward, that everyone will say "Oh yeah. Of course". So we can finally put all the climate denier nonsense behind us and get on with sorting out the planet.


To be honest, there's a mountain of solid evidence for climate change, the trouble is most of it's in the form of statistics, graphs, and solid scientific argument, not nearly as immediate and attention grabbing as a blog headline saying "Climate Change Lies".

8) A new, legally binding agreement to halt the decline in biodiversity to be agreed by all nations. Biodiversity is not a nice-to-have, it's a necessity: Nature provides us with huge economic benefits (from bees pollinating crops to mangroves protecting coastlines) and it will cost us all dearly if we ignore that fact.

9) A new international law to be passed that means that any proposed geoengineering project can only go ahead if scrutinised and approved at a world level (A new U.N. body?). Geoengineering should only be attempted as part of an overall CO2 reduction plan (See item 1 above).

Geoengineering? Are You Kidding?!!

Apparently some influential people are giving serious thought to something called 'geoengineering' to meet the challenge of climate change.

What is geoengineering? According to the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Control) it's about "options that would involve large-scale engineering of our environment in order to combat or counteract the effects of changes in atmospheric chemistry". For example, pumping vast quantities of sulphur into the atmosphere to cool the Earth down, or seeding the oceans with masses of iron in order to encourage plankton to take up more CO2. More examples and detail here.

There are many problems with this sort of thing (See the link above for a list) but my main objections are: a) Will we really know what we're doing? We have such a bad record on influencing Nature, how can we predict the ultimate outcome? We could end up make matters even worse; b) Most forms of geoengineering (including the ones I've mentioned) would undermine efforts to reduce carbon emissions, and encourage a business-as-usual attitude to using our planet as a toilet. They're not solutions, they just papering over the cracks.

At this point, you're probably thinking that geoengineering is just science fiction. However, it is seriously being looked at by governments, groups, and wealthy individuals right now. The U.S. has already carried out testing on the idea of dumping iron in the oceans, whilst the Russians are experimenting with spraying aerosols into the atmosphere to cause localised weather effects.

Nervous? You should be. Geoengineering is like a Pandora's Box: Once we open it, we may regret it for generations to come.