Support the Arctic Sea Ice Forum and Blog

Author Topic: Geoengineering, another rush for money?  (Read 78604 times)

SteveMDFP

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1438
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 184
  • Likes Given: 15
Re: Geoengineering, another rush for money?
« Reply #350 on: July 05, 2019, 05:13:33 PM »
For example, in this work  predicted is the peak of phosphorus mining around 2035.

Probably by 2100 most of the forests on the planet will be destroyed.

"Peak phosphate" is a valid concern.  However, there are advances that may permit wider use of phosphite instead of phosphate.   See, for example,

Phosphite: a novel P fertilizer for weed management and pathogen control
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5698055/

For a broad view on advances in agricultural productivity, see:

THE FUTURE OF AGRICULTURE
https://www.economist.com/technology-quarterly/2016-06-09/factory-fresh

These both emphasize biotech innovations, which many may not be comfortable with.

A simpler way to promote needed changes in land use would be to include beef in a global carbon tax system.  This should reduce economic incentives that drive deforestation.


Tom_Mazanec

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1516
    • View Profile
    • Planet Mazanec
  • Liked: 333
  • Likes Given: 57
Re: Geoengineering, another rush for money?
« Reply #352 on: August 02, 2019, 01:49:02 AM »
Harvard advisory panel on Geoengineering:
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-02331-y
SHARKS (CROSSED OUT) MONGEESE (SIC) WITH FRICKIN LASER BEAMS ATTACHED TO THEIR HEADS

Tom_Mazanec

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1516
    • View Profile
    • Planet Mazanec
  • Liked: 333
  • Likes Given: 57
Re: Geoengineering, another rush for money?
« Reply #353 on: August 14, 2019, 03:36:10 AM »
Bill Gates in favor of blocking out the sun
https://news.yahoo.com/bill-gates-backing-plan-to-stop-climate-change-by-blocking-out-the-sun-183601437.html
A test of the technology is proposed for this year.
SHARKS (CROSSED OUT) MONGEESE (SIC) WITH FRICKIN LASER BEAMS ATTACHED TO THEIR HEADS

DrTskoul

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1451
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 210
  • Likes Given: 60
Re: Geoengineering, another rush for money?
« Reply #354 on: August 15, 2019, 01:10:03 AM »
I am sure nothing will go wrong... /sarc

petm

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 675
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 334
  • Likes Given: 27
Re: Geoengineering, another rush for money?
« Reply #355 on: August 15, 2019, 01:31:52 AM »
Jeebus not the guy who ruined computers. We're doomed.

TerryM

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 5249
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 426
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Geoengineering, another rush for money?
« Reply #356 on: August 15, 2019, 11:33:35 AM »
Jeebus not the guy who ruined computers. We're doomed.


Could we drape a silk nighty or two over our solar panels as a "proof of concept" before giving the aging boy genius free reign?


What's he done since licensing Quick and Dirty DOS (which he didn't own), to a very gullible representative of Big Blue? - I've always wondered whether the rep. was that gullible, or whether he founded a behind the spotlight dynasty based on under the table dealings?
Terry

gerontocrat

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 6572
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1520
  • Likes Given: 21
Re: Geoengineering, another rush for money?
« Reply #357 on: August 15, 2019, 01:57:03 PM »
Bill Gates' addiction to technological solutions is becoming a menace.
With Trump in charge and a gopher as the new boss of NASA one must doubt that good sense will prevail.

Some of you may remember that the Russkies tried the big mirror in the sky a few years back.
But their idea was the opposite - to light up and warm up Siberia in winter.
The big mirror failed to unfurl, many in the world breathed a sigh of relief.


"Para a Causa do Povo a Luta Continua!"
"And that's all I'm going to say about that". Forrest Gump
"Damn, I wanted to see what happened next" (Epitaph)

DrTskoul

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1451
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 210
  • Likes Given: 60
Re: Geoengineering, another rush for money?
« Reply #358 on: August 15, 2019, 02:01:01 PM »
Bill Gates' addiction to technological solutions is becoming a menace.
With Trump in charge and a gopher as the new boss of NASA one must doubt that good sense will prevail.

Some of you may remember that the Russkies tried the big mirror in the sky a few years back.
But their idea was the opposite - to light up and warm up Siberia in winter.
The big mirror failed to unfurl, many in the world breathed a sigh of relief.

Like it needs more warming...

Some people pray to the altar of technology thinking it has no limits. We have marveled at the evolution  of electronics and the  revolution  it brought to other fields of science, and we think we are limitless in all fields. However nature has other ideas... 

morganism

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 171
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 12
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Geoengineering, another rush for money?
« Reply #359 on: August 17, 2019, 11:43:16 PM »
Hadn't seen this one- reducing the number of trees in Siberia, to increase its albedo ?

https://elidourado.com/blog/dawn-of-geoengineering/

"The core idea is delightfully counterintuitive: Siberia has too many trees. In ages past, Siberia used to be grassland, and today it is mostly forest. Although trees can sequester carbon in their trunks and branches (at least until they burn or decompose), Siberian forests have significant drawbacks with respect to climate change.

First, forests don’t reflect a lot of solar radiation. A treeless, grassy Siberia would increase Earth’s albedo, reflecting more solar energy back into space. Forests absorb more solar radiation and put it into the ground as heat.

Second, forests are poor habitats for snow-trampling herd animals. In the winter, a thick layer of snow acts as an insulator on the permafrost, preventing frigid above-ground temperatures from reaching deep into the Earth’s crust, where they can shore up the frozenness of the permafrost. When large herds of grazing animals trample the snow, its insulating properties are reduced and the permafrost can hard freeze. Forests reduce these snow-trampling grazing populations."

TerryM

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 5249
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 426
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Geoengineering, another rush for money?
« Reply #360 on: August 18, 2019, 12:46:31 AM »
Hadn't seen this one- reducing the number of trees in Siberia, to increase its albedo ?

https://elidourado.com/blog/dawn-of-geoengineering/

"The core idea is delightfully counterintuitive: Siberia has too many trees. In ages past, Siberia used to be grassland, and today it is mostly forest. Although trees can sequester carbon in their trunks and branches (at least until they burn or decompose), Siberian forests have significant drawbacks with respect to climate change.

First, forests don’t reflect a lot of solar radiation. A treeless, grassy Siberia would increase Earth’s albedo, reflecting more solar energy back into space. Forests absorb more solar radiation and put it into the ground as heat.

Second, forests are poor habitats for snow-trampling herd animals. In the winter, a thick layer of snow acts as an insulator on the permafrost, preventing frigid above-ground temperatures from reaching deep into the Earth’s crust, where they can shore up the frozenness of the permafrost. When large herds of grazing animals trample the snow, its insulating properties are reduced and the permafrost can hard freeze. Forests reduce these snow-trampling grazing populations."
Damn Rooskies are trying to steal my Green Pellets for Green Washing project.
Terry >:(

vox_mundi

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1640
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 652
  • Likes Given: 113
Re: Geoengineering, another rush for money?
« Reply #361 on: August 23, 2019, 03:01:15 PM »
Industry Guidance Pushes Untested Tech as Climate Fix
https://phys.org/news/2019-08-industry-guidance-touts-untested-tech.html

Draft guidelines for how industry fights climate change promote the widespread use of untested technologies that experts fear could undermine efforts to slash planet-warming greenhouse gas emissions, AFP can reveal

The International Organization for Standardization (ISO), a global industry-driven non-profit group comprising more than 160 member states, has produced new draft guidance on climate action for businesses.

Rather than measuring climate action by the yardstick of emissions reduction, the draft, seen by AFP, concentrates on managing "radiative forcing", which is the amount of excess energy trapped in Earth's atmosphere.

Specifically, it looks at techniques for manipulating the climate through large-scale geoengineering, notably one called Solar Radiation Management (SRM).


SRM entails injecting heat-deflecting aerosols directly into Earth's stratosphere to bounce more of the Sun's heat back into space.

Studies have shown that SRM could be extremely effective—and relatively inexpensive—in stemming rising temperatures.

But there are fears that tinkering with Earth's atmosphere could unleash a tide of unintended consequences, potentially destabilising global weather patterns and undermining food security.

... "What is so significant about this process is that the ISO is a global standard-setting body. Companies tout their ISO compliance as a demonstration of the validity of what they are doing," he told AFP

Quote
... "There is a really profound risk when you take something as untested, controversial, politically volatile and morally risky as geoengineering and you make it the subject of industry-driven, market-oriented standards,"

- Carroll Muffett, president of the Centre for International Environmental Law

In March, discussions at the United Nations Environment Assembly in Nairobi were held up over a dispute centred on the future governance of geoengineering schemes such as SRM.

Sources close to the talks told AFP at the time that the US and Saudi delegations voiced "fierce opposition" to even the mention of international oversight.

"Our interpretation is that they want to avoid further regulation, governance, oversight over these technologies and it's definitely in the interest of the fossil fuel industry," said Linda Schneider, senior programme officer at the Heinrich Boll Institute.

Trade organisations funded by oil and gas majors have for several years advocated SRM, including the influential American Enterprise Institute (AEI).

One AEI policy paper from 2013 concluded: "The incentives for using SRM appear to be stronger than those for (greenhouse gas) control".
“There are three classes of people: those who see. Those who see when they are shown. Those who do not see.” ― Leonardo da Vinci

Insensible before the wave so soon released by callous fate. Affected most, they understand the least, and understanding, when it comes, invariably arrives too late

DrTskoul

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1451
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 210
  • Likes Given: 60
Re: Geoengineering, another rush for money?
« Reply #362 on: August 23, 2019, 03:24:37 PM »
The biggest issue that I have is that there is no way to "de-risk" the scale-up other than global transport models that are not adequately quantitative there is no "mini earth system" physical model to understand what will happen. There is about 100% chance of an unexpected negative consequence. What they will focus is to try and convince us that the consequence is going to be less than doing nothing....

Richard Rathbone

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 530
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 37
  • Likes Given: 7
Re: Geoengineering, another rush for money?
« Reply #363 on: August 23, 2019, 08:44:04 PM »
The biggest issue that I have is that there is no way to "de-risk" the scale-up other than global transport models that are not adequately quantitative there is no "mini earth system" physical model to understand what will happen. There is about 100% chance of an unexpected negative consequence. What they will focus is to try and convince us that the consequence is going to be less than doing nothing....

Who pays for the consequences?

A geoengineering scheme is going to get blamed for every weather disaster that happens after its launched. I don't think US backing would last past the next Harvey and if others keep it going after US approval vanishes, there's going to be some really nasty consequences to them after the next Katrina. Imagine a US public convinced that the Chinese and EU had deliberately caused a catastrophic flood of a major US population centre.

wili

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 2589
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 163
  • Likes Given: 301
Re: Geoengineering, another rush for money?
« Reply #364 on: August 23, 2019, 09:40:15 PM »
vox quoting c. muffet: "There is a really profound risk when you take something as untested, controversial, politically volatile and morally risky as geoengineering and you make it the subject of industry-driven, market-oriented standards..."

Or as Lovelock once put it...it's like putting a goat in charge of a garden...
"A force de chercher de bonnes raisons, on en trouve; on les dit; et après on y tient, non pas tant parce qu'elles sont bonnes que pour ne pas se démentir." Choderlos de Laclos "You struggle to come up with some valid reasons, then cling to them, not because they're good, but just to not back down."

TerryM

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 5249
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 426
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Geoengineering, another rush for money?
« Reply #365 on: August 24, 2019, 12:04:37 AM »
vox quoting c. muffet: "There is a really profound risk when you take something as untested, controversial, politically volatile and morally risky as geoengineering and you make it the subject of industry-driven, market-oriented standards..."

Or as Lovelock once put it...it's like putting a goat in charge of a garden...
or - an old goat in charge of the Haram. ::)
Terry

vox_mundi

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1640
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 652
  • Likes Given: 113
Re: Geoengineering, another rush for money?
« Reply #366 on: August 24, 2019, 12:16:35 AM »
Ramen!
“There are three classes of people: those who see. Those who see when they are shown. Those who do not see.” ― Leonardo da Vinci

Insensible before the wave so soon released by callous fate. Affected most, they understand the least, and understanding, when it comes, invariably arrives too late

TerryM

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 5249
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 426
  • Likes Given: 5
Re: Geoengineering, another rush for money?
« Reply #367 on: August 24, 2019, 01:28:01 AM »
Ramen!
May his Noodly Appendage rest lightly on your shoulders.
Ramen !


Terry

morganism

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 171
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 12
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Geoengineering, another rush for money?
« Reply #368 on: August 25, 2019, 12:15:30 AM »
Enhanced (adsortive) Natural Gas Storage to Help Reduce Global Warming

" Of these 29 distinct chemical structures, COP-150 was particularly noteworthy as it achieved a high deliverable gravimetric methane working capacity when cycled between 5 and 100 bar at 273 K, which is 98% of the total uptake capacity. This result surpassed the target set by the United States Department of Energy (US DOE).

COP-150 is the first ever structure to fulfil both the gravimetric and volumetric requirements of the US DOE for successful vehicular use, and the total cost to produce the COP-150 adsorbent was only 1 USD per kilogram.

COP-150 can be produced using freely available and easily accessible plastic materials, and moreover, its synthesis takes place at room temperature, open to the air, and no previous purification of the chemicals is required. The pressure-triggered flexible structure of COP-150 is also advantageous in terms of the total working capacity of deliverable methane for real applications."

https://www.kaist.ac.kr/_prog/_board/?mode=V&no=100841&code=ed_news&site_dvs_cd=en&menu_dvs_cd=0601&list_typ=B&skey=&sval=&smonth=&site_dvs=&GotoPage=

This study, reported in Nature Energy on July 8, was supported by National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) grants ( NRF-2016R1A2B4011027, NRF-2017M3A7B4042140, and NRF-2017M3A7B4042235

morganism

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 171
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 12
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Geoengineering, another rush for money?
« Reply #369 on: August 28, 2019, 10:21:30 PM »
"tests confirmed that water microdroplets spontaneously form hydrogen peroxide, that smaller microdroplets produced higher concentrations of the molecule, and that hydrogen peroxide was not lost when the microdroplets recombined into bulk water.

The researchers ruled out a number of possible explanations before arriving at what they argue is the most likely explanation for hydrogen peroxide's presence. They suggest that a strong electric field near the surface of water microdroplets in air triggers hydroxyl molecules to bind into hydrogen peroxide."

https://phys.org/news/2019-08-chemists-microdroplets-spontaneously-hydrogen-peroxide.html

www.pnas.org/cgi/doi/10.1073/pnas.1911883116

Archimid

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 2363
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 288
  • Likes Given: 184
Re: Geoengineering, another rush for money?
« Reply #370 on: October 22, 2019, 01:48:47 PM »
We know that if we block solar radiation in the Arctic summer we reduce the melting. Easy peasy.

But how do we increase freezing during winter?

Large floating platforms (in the hundreds or thousands of KM^2 scale) that will lower albedo, gather snow and dampen waves. The idea is to simulate land fast ice in the middle of the ocean to "seed" sea ice. Once the sea ice is seeded the polar night takes care of the rest.

This will allow the open ocean to close as early as possible giving it as much time to thicken as possible.

Like all geoengineering solutions, this must be done at the same time as CO2 is reduced, forests are regrown and pollution is eliminated.

Time is running out, maximizing the life of the Arctic will buy us some time.
I am an energy reservoir seemingly intent on lowering entropy for self preservation.