Please support this Forum and Neven's Blog

Author Topic: Geoengineering, another rush for money?  (Read 28945 times)

AbruptSLR

  • ASIF Emperor
  • Posts: 10983
    • View Profile
Re: Geoengineering, another rush for money?
« Reply #150 on: February 10, 2017, 05:43:02 PM »
The link leads to a compilation of papers on Geogineering in Earth's Future entitled: "Crutzen +10: Reflecting upon 10 years of geoengineering research".  The compilation includes a lot of papers that cover a wide ranges of topics and perspectives.  My only comment is that when many denialists believe that geoengineering will be implemented then they are prepared to admit that climate sensitivity is high so that they can demand a lot of geoengineeing.


http://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/hub/issue/10.1002/(ISSN)2328-4277.GEOENGIN1/

Summary: "The year 2016 marked the 10 year anniversary of Nobel laureate Paul Crutzen's seminal 2006 contribution on geoengineering, “Albedo enhancement by stratospheric sulfur injection: A contribution to solve a policy dilemma?” Crutzen’s paper in climatic change sparked an unprecedented surge of academic, public, and political interest in geoengineering. This collection comprises research and commentaries from leading experts in the field of geoengineering on the development of the discussion over the past decade and to consider where it may be going in the next 10 years."
“It is not the strongest or the most intelligent who will survive but those who can best manage change.”
― Leon C. Megginson

AbruptSLR

  • ASIF Emperor
  • Posts: 10983
    • View Profile
Re: Geoengineering, another rush for money?
« Reply #151 on: February 10, 2017, 05:55:03 PM »
In the linked reference the author voice their opinion that China will not unilaterally implement geoengineering, but they offer what they believe to be lessons learned from China's long history of manipulating the environment, so that the world community will be able to act more according to Chinese thinking when it decides to implement geoengineering when our communal situation become sufficiently desperate.

John C. Moore, Ying Chen, Xuefeng Cui, Wenping Yuan, Wenjie Dong, Yun Gao & Peijun Shi (13 December 2016), Will China be the first to initiate climate engineering?" Earth's Future, DOI: 10.1002/2016EF000402

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/2016EF000402/full

Abstract: "Over the last 30 years, China has industrialized more rapidly than any other society in history and become the world's largest emitter of CO2. This has demonstrated unprecedented ability to change the socioeconomic landscape, produced great wealth, and led to some catastrophic environmental damage. This is the background that has motivated several authors to postulate that China would initiate geoengineering using solar radiation management. But will China be the first to pioneer climate engineering? The answer, we argue here, is likely to be “no!” We reach this conclusion from an analysis of the historic philosophical tradition that informs the Chinese world view, China's experience of mega-engineering projects both ancient and modern, and the policies implemented over the last 60 years. The debate on geoengineering has to-date been almost exclusively Euro-American, but China has mega-engineering experience, huge resources, and a radically different world-view that needs to be acknowledged. Furthermore we contend that these experiences can be useful internationally in helping to frame the debate on climate mitigation from the perspective of the earth as shared, multiuse and finite."

See also:

https://eos.org/editors-vox/good-night-sunshine-geoengineering-solutions-to-climate-change?utm_source=eos&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=EosBuzz021017
“It is not the strongest or the most intelligent who will survive but those who can best manage change.”
― Leon C. Megginson

bairgon

  • ASIF Lurker
  • Posts: 63
    • View Profile
Re: Geoengineering, another rush for money?
« Reply #152 on: February 12, 2017, 07:47:53 AM »
"Could a £400bn plan to refreeze the Arctic before the ice melts really work? "

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/feb/12/plan-to-refreeze-arctic-before-ice-goes-for-good-climate-change

Proposed wind pumps to bring water up to the top of the ice, increasing ice thickness.

"[It] may become necessary if we want to halt the calamity that faces the Arctic, says Desch, who, like many other scientists, has become alarmed at temperature change in the region. They say that it is now warming twice as fast as their climate models predicted only a few years ago and argue that the 2015 Paris agreement to limit global warming will be insufficient to prevent the region’s sea ice disappearing completely in summer, possibly by 2030."

gerontocrat

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 125
    • View Profile
Re: Geoengineering, another rush for money?
« Reply #153 on: February 13, 2017, 10:09:29 PM »
CHINA
20 + years ago I worked on some environmental projects in SW China. There was a widespread belief that the big environmental problems building up from 10+ percent annual economic growth could be fixed later. " Man can fix nature to man's requirements." Talk about being a prophet in the wilderness.

Maybe by now the decision-makers in China  are more cautious ? We will see. Geo-engineering scares me witless. Natural systems are just too complex - unforseen consequences rule, OK?

Pragma

  • ASIF Lurker
  • Posts: 22
    • View Profile
Re: Geoengineering, another rush for money?
« Reply #154 on: February 20, 2017, 07:54:14 PM »
DARK Humour:

It's not meant to be, and perhaps it's just my way of dealing with the stress, but I found this article to be hilarious.

http://www.cbc.ca/radio/thecurrent/the-current-for-february-20-2017-1.3988710/can-a-500-billion-geoengineering-project-save-the-arctic-from-melting-1.3990917

The best stuff is in the accompanying audio.

I won't even begin to opine on why this is a non-starter, because I likely won't stop.

I'll leave it up to the forum to decide on the motivation for such a hare brained scheme.

DrTskoul

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 550
    • View Profile
Re: Geoengineering, another rush for money?
« Reply #155 on: February 20, 2017, 08:02:21 PM »
DARK Humour:

It's not meant to be, and perhaps it's just my way of dealing with the stress, but I found this article to be hilarious.

http://www.cbc.ca/radio/thecurrent/the-current-for-february-20-2017-1.3988710/can-a-500-billion-geoengineering-project-save-the-arctic-from-melting-1.3990917

The best stuff is in the accompanying audio.

I won't even begin to opine on why this is a non-starter, because I likely won't stop.

I'll leave it up to the forum to decide on the motivation for such a hare brained scheme.


Hate brained schemers above are well meaning. Just not quite strong on analysis...
“You can know the name of a bird in all the languages of the world, but when you're finished, you'll know absolutely nothing whatever about the bird... So let's look at the bird and see what it's doing -- that's what counts.”
― Richard P. Feynman

AbruptSLR

  • ASIF Emperor
  • Posts: 10983
    • View Profile
Re: Geoengineering, another rush for money?
« Reply #156 on: February 23, 2017, 06:42:15 PM »
The linked article is entitled: "Biomass subsidies ‘not fit for purpose’, says Chatham House".   It raises major doubts about the use of biomass to fight climate change.

https://www.carbonbrief.org/biomass-subsidies-not-fit-for-purpose-chatham-house

Extract: "Subsidies should end for many types of biomass, a new Chatham House report argues, because they are failing to help cut greenhouse gas emissions."
“It is not the strongest or the most intelligent who will survive but those who can best manage change.”
― Leon C. Megginson

AbruptSLR

  • ASIF Emperor
  • Posts: 10983
    • View Profile
Re: Geoengineering, another rush for money?
« Reply #157 on: March 16, 2017, 03:17:35 AM »
While the following 2014 reference is nothing particularly relevant (or timely) to our current climate change situation, it does demonstrate that strange attractors can be stabilized by feedback linearization.  Therefore, as I believe that climate attractors amplify climate sensitivity above what it would be otherwise; I recommend that before studying more blunt force types of geoengineering, that scientists explore the possibilities associated with stabilizing climate attractors:

Shaqarin et. al. (July 2014), ”Stabilizations of Strange Attractors by Feedback Linearization”, Research Journal of Applied Sciences, Engineering and Technology 8(1):43-47, DOI: 10.19026/rjaset.8.938

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/289106876_Stabilizations_of_Strange_Attractors_by_Feedback_Linearization

Abstract: “This study deals with the control of the Lorenz, Chen and Lu chaotic system. Feedback linearization was successfully implemented on these chaotic systems. Feedback linearization was successful to transform the three attractor systems to a general system that simplify the linear control analysis. Hence, a linear controller is designed for the feedback linearized general system. Furthermore, some numerical simulations were carried out for the closed loop systems. These simulations show that the developed controller design method is effective in stabilizing and regulating the response.”

Edit: I noted that in the Science folder and the associated "Modelling the Anthropocene" thread, I provide posts about references how how to model climate attractors; while in the Consequences folder and the associated "Conservative Scientists and its Consequences" folder I provide several posts that relate climate attractors to both observed & paleo data.
« Last Edit: March 16, 2017, 03:39:06 AM by AbruptSLR »
“It is not the strongest or the most intelligent who will survive but those who can best manage change.”
― Leon C. Megginson

sidd

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1001
    • View Profile
Re: Geoengineering, another rush for money?
« Reply #158 on: March 16, 2017, 04:17:23 AM »
"...  climate attractors amplify climate sensitivity above what it would be otherwise ..."

I do not understand. Climate trajectories explore the phase space in the attractor's basin of convergence, the climate sensitivity is only properly defined within that basin. The stucture of the attractor defines the sensitivity, and i do not understand what "amplifies" means in this context.

sidd

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1001
    • View Profile
Re: Geoengineering, another rush for money?
« Reply #159 on: March 25, 2017, 04:48:27 AM »
https://www.technologyreview.com/s/603974/harvard-scientists-moving-ahead-on-plans-for-atmospheric-geoengineering-experiments/

What could go wrong ? Well, some yahoo like me with a balloon an a bag of talc could cause drought in the Sahel. Naaa, never happen.

sidd

AbruptSLR

  • ASIF Emperor
  • Posts: 10983
    • View Profile
Re: Geoengineering, another rush for money?
« Reply #160 on: March 25, 2017, 04:31:38 PM »
"...  climate attractors amplify climate sensitivity above what it would be otherwise ..."

I do not understand. Climate trajectories explore the phase space in the attractor's basin of convergence, the climate sensitivity is only properly defined within that basin. The stucture of the attractor defines the sensitivity, and i do not understand what "amplifies" means in this context.

What I was rather clumsily trying to say is that as computer power is limited, current state-of the-art Earth System Models are not properly follow chaos theory (using the phase space in the attractor's basin), and as they are unlikely to be able to do so for many decades (well after my estimated socio-economic collapse in the 2045 - 2060 timeframe); I recommend that AR6 not only recalibrate their ESM response sensitivities, but that they also include discussions about key climate attractors like for example ENSO (which is dependent on both phase relationships of multiple feedback mechanisms and on initial boundary conditions).  I use this as an exampled as there is plenty of evidence that aerosols over the Tropical Pacific have a major impact on ENSO (& I believe that an increasingly El Nino-like ENSO will not only directly increase GMSTA but will also accelerate Arctic Amplification) and thus localized control of aerosols over the Tropical Pacific may be able to blunt feedbacks that may drive ECS towards 5C this century (see the middle panel of the attached image by Andrew from the 2015 Ringberg Workshop).

Edit: I provide the second image of ECS from various different paleo-eras, to demonstrate the ECS is not a fixed number but is dependent upon the level of activation of the various feedback mechanisms under different climate conditions.
“It is not the strongest or the most intelligent who will survive but those who can best manage change.”
― Leon C. Megginson

Shared Humanity

  • ASIF Upper Class
  • Posts: 1758
    • View Profile
Re: Geoengineering, another rush for money?
« Reply #161 on: March 25, 2017, 04:36:46 PM »
By 2040, we will be employing all manner of geoengineering techniques in a desperate to attempt to halt warming with disastrous results.

DrTskoul

  • ASIF Middle Class
  • Posts: 550
    • View Profile
Re: Geoengineering, another rush for money?
« Reply #162 on: March 25, 2017, 05:37:58 PM »
By 2040, we will be employing all manner of geoengineering techniques in a desperate to attempt to halt warming with disastrous results.

Can't wait for the New Little Ice Age of the 2070's that led to worldwide famine, brought to being by the geoengineering trials of the stratospheric aerosol injections. Followed by the rapid warmup of the 2080's when the aerosols washed out.
“You can know the name of a bird in all the languages of the world, but when you're finished, you'll know absolutely nothing whatever about the bird... So let's look at the bird and see what it's doing -- that's what counts.”
― Richard P. Feynman

Cate

  • ASIF Citizen
  • Posts: 163
    • View Profile
Re: Geoengineering, another rush for money?
« Reply #163 on: Today at 02:20:48 AM »
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/true-north/2017/mar/27/trump-presidency-opens-door-to-planet-hacking-geoengineer-experiments

"Under the Trump administration, enthusiasm appears to be growing for the controversial technology of solar geo-engineering, which aims to spray sulphate particles into the atmosphere to reflect the sun’s radiation back to space and decrease the temperature of Earth.......
David Schnare, an architect of Trump’s Environmental Protection Agency transition, has lobbied the US government and testified to Senate in favour of federal support for geoengineering.
He has called for a multi-phase plan to fund research and conduct real-world testing within 18 months, deploy massive stratospheric spraying three years after, and continue spraying for a century, a duration geoengineers believe would be necessary to dial back the planet’s temperature......"