Leaked: smoke and mirror geoengineering ideas from the IPCC

Must be IPCC week. When it rains the stupid, it pours.  From the Telegraph:

IPCC ‘considering sending mirrors to space to tackle climate change’

Reflective aerosols would be sent into space under a series of radical “geo-engineering” measures being considered by the UN climate science body to tackle climate change, leaked documents disclose.

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) papers, leaked ahead of a key meeting in Peru next week, outline the series of techniques in which scientists hope will manipulate the world’s climate to reduce carbon emissions.

Among the ideas proposed by a group of 60 leading scientists from around the world, including Britain, include producing “lighter coloured” crops to reflect sunlight, blasting aerosol “mirrors” into the stratosphere and suppressing cirrus clouds.

Other suggestions include spraying sea water into clouds as another reflection mechanism, depositing massive quantities of iron filings into the oceans, painting streets and roofs white and adding lime to oceans.

Experts suggested that the documents, leaked from inside the IPPC to The Guardian, show how the UN and other developed countries are “despairing” about reaching agreement by consensus at the global climate change talks.

But the newspaper reported that scientists admit that even if the ideas theoretically work, they could cause irreversible consequences.

Full story here

====================================================

Just an FYI, the documents in full are publicly available at SCRIBD here:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/57920959/Joint-IPCC-expert-meeting-on-geoengineering-keynote-abstracts

The key buzzphrase is – “solar radiation management”, but there’s a catch they mention:

That, and the fact that it’s batshit crazy and a powder-keg for priming a global explosion of the law of unintended consequences.

Even Joe Romm doesn’t like the idea because of this catch, and when Romm starts rejecting crazy climate ideas, you know it’s bad. I’ll bet Greenpeace has made a recommendation for it though.

h/t to WUWT reader AndiC

About these ads

114 thoughts on “Leaked: smoke and mirror geoengineering ideas from the IPCC

  1. I’d suggest launching AGW scientists with the highest albedo into orbit about the Earth. This would become the new “bozone layer.”

  2. I suppose this is the ultimate test of faith of the pro-AGW crew. If they really believe we are all going to cook, if they believe their GCMs are giving accurate predictions, then they must believe the aerosol shield is a good idea. If nagging at the back of their mind is the worry that we might be plunged into a new ice age in consequence, then there’s hope.

  3. Now just a cotton-picking minute there! On the one hand CAGW acolytes are screaming loud and long that a quiescent Sun – reducing the amount of energy that the earth receives- will make little or no difference to global warming. On the other, they are postulating that very expensive sunshades will mitigate global warming by reducing the amount of energy the Earth receives. Is there a logical dichotomy in these statements or am I missing something?

  4. BTW. Not keen on this new-fanggled lay-out. Pre-set font is far too small and using built-in correctors is a buggeration factor I could do without.

  5. The last time I ever saw some suggestion of sticking some huge disk in space was when it was a solar cell array that converted the energy to microwaves, and the system sent that power to earth….. hay no worries the microwave energy had a low energy density as to not cook aircraft passengers. Back then, make power, now screw power, unless it’s wind pork.

  6. Bassetedge, a commenter in the Guardian said:-
    “Are they going to send them up in wind-powered rocket ships?

    Loonies.”

    Must qualify for Quote Of The Week!

  7. Well this story has some interesting turns of phrase.

    The fact is all of these ideas have been floated before so they are definitely not secrets. Therefore the word “leak” seems to be misleading. Seems like some shabby newspaper reporting.

    The whole debate about geoengineering has been on a while so I can’t understand how the WUWT readership missed it. And contrary to what Anthony suggests I believe greenpeace are in the anti camp. Looks like the greenies and Anthony agree on something.

    I also don’t think it’s accurate to say the IPCC is “considering” geoengineering. That implies it is able to institute action and to perform geoengineering. It can’t do that. There is likely no framework for geoengineering to be done at all. The IPCC’s role is simply to collate information so it’s hosting a meeting. That’s all.

    The geoengineering stuff is only going to get off the ground if and when mother nature starts beating the human race around the head in a serious way. So stop panicking, it’s just scifi at this point in time.

  8. Grumpy Old Man UK – re CAGW acolytes and a quiescent Sun :- It’s very simple. If the sun does it, it has no effect on climate. If man does it, then it does. It doesn’t matter what “it” is, or, for that matter, what “the sun” is.

    But all these extravagant geoengineering schemes are a complete waste of money and effort. There is an existing cheap, simple and effective method: Move each weather station a bit further uphill every year or so. Bingo! Problem solved. The moves can even be virtual, reducing the cost to almost zero.

  9. The official line already being peddled by the BBC is that a quiescent sun may just give us a brief respite in which to solve the CO2 problem before things get out of control.

  10. jorgekafkazar says:
    June 17, 2011 at 12:12 am
    I’d suggest launching AGW scientists with the highest albedo into orbit about the Earth. This would become the new “bozone layer.”

    I nearly had to be re-engineered to be able to get back on my chair after falling off laughing!

  11. Does one need any further proof that the lunatics have truly taken over the asylum?

  12. Some brilliant comments here. me has pointed to the assured response to a quiet sun by the AGW crowd. They will fail to see the connection between active sun and warming but cooling and spotless sun; thats a given.

    Are you sure the geos are not writing a script for James Cameron’s next “Avatar”?

  13. If, just for the sake of argument, global T rose by 2C (in the winter, in northern latitudes, at night) would there be less CO2 emitted by the evil humans as a result of them turning their heating down?

    Also “manipulate the world’s climate to reduce carbon emissions” ???? Seriously?

  14. So, the eco-stalinist loonies hate mankind because humans are destroying the planet (allegedly), so they propose placing all sorts of pollutants into the atmosphere & oceans to compensate for it. Barking mad, barking mad. I only support the idea of geo-engineering after a brief chat with Dr Richard S. Courtney, a while ago, as it gives the politicians a way out of the pit they have dug themselves into.

    Sun – 99.9% of mass of Solar system, Earth – 3 x 10^-6 of that mass. Tell me again how a 1/10th of 1% change in TSI of something so massive cannot affect the earths atmosphere? One enters ones home in the evening & it is cold. One turns the central heating on (what a luxury), but you are still cold. Half an hour later, you aren’t quite as cold but still not toasty! An hour later the “atmosphere” of the house is at 20°C & one is toasty! Such things are not instantaneous! If the boiler breaks down, you don’t freeze immediately, the heat (regardless of specific insulation) takes time to equalize with the external temperature. It’s the same with Solar output & our atmosphere/climate. Call me Mr Picky, but someone is fiddling the books somewhere down the line! The thing is, Solar variability doesn’t require a Marxist Socialist Intellectual Elitist Global Government run by self-enriching sanctimonious self-righteous hypocrits, shame!

  15. ‘There could be irreversible consequences’.
    Could change to Will.

    This sounds like a bunch of juvenile school boys trying to out think the stupidest plan to bring doom to the planet.

    Stop the grants of these people to bring them to their senses.

  16. There is a simple and cost effective geoengineering solution that is already in widespread use in Australia, because it is cost effective and it works to help keep cool.

    Put reflective metallic roofs on buildings. They reflect about 70% of sunlight back up into the atmosphere and at wavelengths that are not absorbed by CO2.

    Why this obvious solution isn’t pursued is rather a mystery to me.

    I must assume because it doesn’t incorporate the necessary penance factor to mitigate the guilt of energy gluttony.

  17. Isn’t this what used to be called “Blue Sky Thinking” (research)???
    (sorry)
    Of course, there are lots of other ways to describe it but few are printable, so often the case with the incestuous lunacy that is CAGW

  18. “But the newspaper reported that scientists admit that even if the ideas theoretically work, they could cause irreversible consequences.” The law of unintended consequences would surely kick in.

    What would the anti-GMO lobbyists say to “producing “lighter coloured” crops….?

  19. “The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) papers, leaked ahead of a key meeting in Peru next week, outline the series of techniques in which scientists hope will manipulate the world’s climate to reduce carbon emissions.”

    [snip] How do mirror in spaces or altering albedo in any way reduce carbon emmissions? Since both the Guardian and the Telegraph use the words “to reduce carbon emissions” it suggests that they have been fed those words from within the IPCC.

  20. This is where green advocacy groups within the IPCC would like to lead us. This is where the scam will lead to as they are out to make money. It is the likes of Monbiot and Romm who have done so much damage in order to get us where we are today; now they recoil in horror at some of the proposed solutions to tackle the weather.

    * The law of unintended consequences
    *Earth maybe tipped to extreme cold leading to widespread crop failures & famine
    *The Earth maybe entering a prolonged cooling period
    *Massive costs involved

    Here is a lesson on why it’s better sit tight while all around you are losing their heads.
    2007
    AUSTRALIA: “Scientists study cloud seeding to tackle drought”

    http://www.abc.net.au/am/content/2007/s1915911.htm

    2011
    Australia’s Queensland faces ‘biblical’ flood

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-12102126

    Also in Australia massive and expensive desalination plants were mothballed. CRAZY!

  21. You guys are so skeptical. Think of all the people that could be employed doing this, the wealth of GDP created!
    We have to find something to do with all the bank tellers displaced by atm machines. (Sarcasm?, you decide, (-;

  22. The idea of having a big mirror in space might prove useful when everyone is freezing their butts off and we need to extend daylight hours to get the crops to grow.

  23. AW what the hell has happened with this?

    http://berkeleyearth.org/

    It was supposed to be FINISHED April 2011, its now mid June 2011…zilch, nada etc. My take… they have analyzed the whole dataset and found a complete flat line or downward trend with global temps since 1880 and are under intense pressure NOT to release the findings. In fact they probably won’t for quite a few years, if the whole enterprise is not shelved ASAP, just in case.

  24. Did these geoengineers come up with these idea having spent all day watching James Bond films, becasue it looks like it? And who gets to play Blofeld complete with pussy ?

  25. If it can be done, forget “saving the world”, the obvious use and the one that always wins out from fireworks to nuclear is a weapon.

    It may start with a “if you don’t contribute to the costs …. guess which country it will be sitting over”, leading on to a “the US president has authorised NASA to relocate the space mirrors over Libya until Colonel Graffiti relinquishes power”.

    Then, some bright spark will realise that you can generate an awful lot of power by using mirrors …. and of course being renewable it’s perfectly green!!! …. then some one will decide that if you can’t get rid of Colonel Graffiti using a big sunshade, you might do it using a huge increase in solar energy targetted …. etc.

  26. Jimbo says @ 2.38am

    Your reference to cloud seeding.
    On the ‘Climate Abyss’ blog as I write, John Neilson-Gammon is counting down the days to his acting as “witness” to just such a cloud seeding demonstration in Texas – due to come off I think on 19th or 20th.
    They are hoping to get 4 – 5 inches of rain to fall in the dry desert!
    He sounds to be terribly thrilled by it all, – sarc/ – but who knows, worth following on his blog anyway ! ! !

  27. Did I say unintended consequences? What some of these charlatans should consider is if it all goes badly wrong then they may have to face the courts. We are talking possible mass famines, deaths, floods, droughts (I’m sounding like a Warmist now). ;O)

    20 reasons why geoengineeringmay be a bad idea [PDF]

    Fixing the Sky: The Checkered History of Weather and Climate Control

    Predicting and verifying the intended and unintended consequences of large-scale ocean iron fertilization

  28. Witch trials next ? or should witches be replaced by polititians, I think this might really work!

  29. The way to tackle man made climate change is for man to change the climate ??

    I suppose that makes sense in their world.

  30. A spokesman for the Intergovernmental Panel for Crippling Countries put forward a shopping list of proposals to save the planet:
    1 All buildings and roofs to be constructed using mirrored glass.
    2 Roads, pavements and hardstandings to be white asphalt or white paviours.
    3 Genetically engineer trees,grass and plants to be white.
    4 Dye the sea white.
    5 Overclad all buildings with mirrored glass.
    6 All to wear white tunics and caps.
    The spokesman said we will not need to do anything with Mont Blanc or the White Cliffs of Dover.
    He continued by saying that not only would the measures reduce temperatures, we would all be living in a winter wonder land.

  31. Ever calculated the tonnage of aluminium to make the mirrors, and the launch capacity (about ten tons per launch) required to get them up there?
    It looks as if certain people are so desperate to be heard they don’t actually think before speaking.

  32. The bit that I enjoyed was pouring massive amounts of iron filings into the sea. Given sufficient funding I would be prepared to search around for some iron that floats!

  33. Plotters always meet in dark secluded places away from the eyes of more astute people.
    Peru, seems a good place, long way away from the media, plus if you are on a sponsored jolly, it is somewhere exotic to talk about when you get back.
    It pains me that I am funding it.

  34. I vaguely remember something about the Russians doing something like this too. Only I think it was a big umbrella to block out the sun to destroy US crops or something. Or was that a Simpsons episode? It’s getting hard to tell the difference.

  35. LazyTeenager says:
    June 17, 2011 at 12:55 am
    ………………..
    The whole debate about geoengineering has been on a while so I can’t understand how the WUWT readership missed it.

    If you were not so lazy you would find that your statement is wrong. See here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here. There are more geoengineering stories on WUWT.

  36. You missed one of the key points from the article that I wrote about last night in that the the people writing the report all have financial stakes in the outcome of the IPCC proposals. Such as people with patents on some of the geo-engineering technologies or people that have requested funds for their projects before.

    The money to be made is readily apparent in this story.

  37. OMG, geoengineering, the new phase in the redgreen attempt to make earth inhabitable.

    If only Star Trek: Voyager was still on… They could be visiting a planet gone mad because of hysteric fear of an innocent atmospheric trace gas. That might open the eyes of the brainwashed public.

    IPCC: Irrational Panel of Climate Craziness

  38. The evil genius of the IPCC and it’s geoengineering ideas are typical of the evil super villains in Science fiction, This evil plot is similar to the “Shield Corporation” subplot of Highlander II

    “Five hundred years later a shield above the earth makes everyone it’s prisoner.”

    In August 1994, news broadcasts announce that the ozone layer is fading, and will be completely gone in a matter of months. In Africa, millions have perished from the effects of unfiltered sunlight.

    By 1999, Connor has become the supervisor of a scientific team headed by Dr. Allan Neyman, which is attempting to create an electromagnetic shield to cover the planet, and protect it from the Sun’s radiation. The team succeeds, in effect giving Earth an artificial ozone layer. MacLeod and Neyman are proud to have saved humanity.

    Unfortunately, the shield has the side effect of condemning the planet to a state of constant night, a high average global temperature and high humidity. By 2024, the years of darkness have caused humanity to lose hope and fall into a decline. The Shield has fallen under the control of the Shield Corporation. The corporation’s current chief executive, David Blake, is focused on profit, and is imposing fees for the corporation’s services.

    Louise Marcus a former employee of the Shield Corporation discovers that the ozone layer has in fact restored itself naturally, which means that the Shield is no longer needed. The Shield Corporation is aware of this development, but has chosen to hide it from the general public, in order to maintain its main source of profit.

  39. Is this simply history repeating itself? I just don’t trust mad scientists. They can’t seem to decide whether the world is warming or cooling and what to do about it.

    Berkeley Daily Gazette – Dec 27, 1939
    “Climate Control By Use of Coal Dust Described”
    “If man could mine the coal of the Antarctic it might be best to use it – not by burning it to melt the ice – but as coal dust which could be spread over the ice and increase greatly the absorption of the sun’s energy.”

    The Sunday News Journal – Jun 1, 1958
    “Scientist Proposes Bold Idea”
    “Let’s get rid of all the ice at the North Pole and the Arctic Ocean, he says.”

    Edmonton Journal – Jul 6, 1953
    “Space Platforms Said Key To Future Weather Control”
    “The weather, in case you hadn’t noticed it, is getting hotter all the time.”

    In 1971, Dr. Holdren, President Obama’s science adviser, warned of a coming new ice age and was open to shooting soot into the upper atmosphere. Today, one option raised to prevent tackle global warming a proposal was raised by Holdren and proposed by a Nobel Prize-winning scientist includes shooting pollution particles into the upper atmosphere to reflect the sun’s rays.

    http://georgewashington2.blogspot.com/2009/12/obamas-current-science-advisor-warned.html

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/30112396/

  40. The United Nations has already placed a moratorium on geoengineering experiments as part of the UN Convention on Biodiversity (signed by 193 countries).

    Whether it has enough teeth to actually stop the IPCC or one of these crazy scientists is an open question.

    I think these meetings demonstrate just how far out there the majority of climate science really is. The fact that the IPCC and card-carrying climate scientists are part of these crazy-geoengineering groups should tell you everything to know about what kind of scientist we are talking about. The careful, objective, proof-seeking kind? Nope.

  41. Strange, lighter colored crops, white roofs and streets, will lower the temperature…..
    …..but land use didn’t raise it
    It’s all CO2…………………..

  42. Philip Bradley says:
    June 17, 2011 at 2:04 am

    Put reflective metallic roofs on buildings. They reflect about 70% of sunlight back up into the atmosphere and at wavelengths that are not absorbed by CO2.

    1. Buildings are but a tiny fraction of the surface of the earth. Look at satellite imagery and notice just how much one must zoom in before even seeing structures.

    2. Most shingles already contain reflective materials. How much difference will the metal make? Besides there is probably not a need to be any more reflective than natural greenery.

    3. Sun-baked metal gets seriously hot and conducts that heat, requiring more insulation.

    4. The blinding light from shiny surfaces, especially near freeways, can be dangerous. This was a lesson learned by a local restaurant that had to coat or etch the metal to make it less reflective.

    5. With age and exposure, reflective surfaces do not retain reflective properties too long. And, there are more important uses for water than roof cleaning.

    Even the simplest “solutions” have consequences. Imagine what large scale geoengineering would do.

  43. Whatever the mad scientists do, the monument to geoengineering has to be very visible to everyone on earth especially schoolchildren. Ideas like reduced albedo crop will just not cut it, that would be like a proud grafitti artist spraying his message on a wall with invisible ink. The geomessage has to be loud and clear … LOOK WHAT WE DID!!. So we can just go through the list and identify which ones they really like and which ones have no chance.
    Large space mirrors .. absolutely positively yes!!!
    aerosols … no, not visible
    dump iron/lime in the sea .. no boooring
    low albedo crops … no not visible enough plus too much credit would go to farmers
    suppressing cirrus clouds … no, no one could tell the difference
    painting streets and roofs white … yes

  44. Apart from sheer stupidity and cost, large mirrors in space, of any kind, have a major flaw. Solar wind. Block or reflect what comes from the sun, and you move a bit. For small things, like the ISS, not even measurable. But, for something really big, as in reducing the incoming energy to cool the earth, very measurable, especially over time. (that’s only one of the many problems with the Solar Power Satellite nonsense)

    And our taxes pay for this {SNIPPING} nonsense.

  45. Latitude said: “Strange, lighter colored crops, white roofs and streets, will lower the temperature…..
    …..but land use didn’t raise it
    It’s all CO2…………………..”

    Bam! Why is this so easily dismissed? Land use changes have significant local effects. What do you get when the local effects multiply and get closer together, then you sum up all those effects?

  46. “manipulate the world’s climate to reduce carbon emissions” – Surely this a complete turn-around? I thought we were being told to reduce CO2 in order to control the climate?

    If we could manipulate the climate, there would be no need to reduce CO2, thereby allowing increased crop production to feed our ever growing population.

  47. Right idea, wrong direction. In order to combat the sudden ice age brought about by volcanic eruptions and solar minimum, we should prepare to pump methane into the atmosphere.

    Makes as much sense as the IPCC stuff, doesn’t it? I’d rather adapt to a warmer world than mess with it on the scale they discuss. All of their schemes will involve vast expenditure of energy anyway, so what’s the point?

  48. Friends:

    The IPCC Working Group 3 only exists to promote geoengineering of global climate.

    This geoengineering consists of proposals to alter GHG emissions and thus – so the IPCC claims – to alter the future temperature of the Earth’s atmosphere. Of course, this geoengineering is complete nonsense, but several governments have responded to it by acting to reduce GHG emissions in attempt to conduct this geoengineering.

    So, the IPCC having succeeded in getting that geoengineering adopted as policy in several places, it is not surprising that the IPCC would consider the next step in geoengineering considerations. Indeed, I predicted the IPCC would take that ‘next step’.

    In a Guest Post at WUWT I made a suggestion to utilise this inevitable IPCC ‘next step’ as a method to enable politicians to reverse policy and to abandon the AGW scare. That Guest Post can be read at

    http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/08/17/stopping-climate-change/

    Ufortunately, most posters in the ensuing thread failed to understand what I was saying (despite my several clarifications) and some refused to concider the ploy.

    Thus, LazyTeenager dispays his usual self-induced delusion when he asserts (at June 17, 2011 at 12:55 am):
    “The geoengineering stuff is only going to get off the ground if and when mother nature starts beating the human race around the head in a serious way. So stop panicking, it’s just scifi at this point in time.”

    Far from being “scifi”, all activities of the IPCC’s Working Group 3 are – and always have been – predicated on promotion of geoengineering the global temperature.

    Richard

  49. How is lowering our CO2 emissions leaving all our other impacts constant not also Geoengineering?
    And that’s precisely why I’m against massive intervention to reduce human CO2 emissions, along with the fact I’m getting less and less convinced all that CO2 is having much effect at all. It’s seems the greatest folly to assume the planet has a great big thermostat we can move at will by controlling our CO2 emissions – something that’s been amply covered on these pages before.

  50. Other suggestions include spraying sea water into clouds as another reflection mechanism, depositing massive quantities of iron filings into the oceans, painting streets and roofs white and adding lime to oceans.

    Of course just about everything proposed here by these nutters is utterly ridiculous – and they know it too. However, I have for a long time been in favour of white (or at least lighter) roads and building materials, not to attempt any effect on climate, but to diminish the urban heat island effect and make city life in the summer more comfortable.

  51. Question from a non-scientist (me): So if the solution to global warming is to reflect the sun’s rays away, while one proposed solution to avoid using CO2 emitting fossil fuels is to put black, non-reflective, solar panels over a significant part of the earth’s surface, does this mean that solar power is, in effect, contributing to the very problem it is intended to solve, by capturing and retaining the very radiation that those mirrors are intended to reflect away?

    With one group suggesting plastering the planet with solar absorbers and the other simultaneously suggesting surrounding it with solar reflectors, I sense government at work playing with tax dollars. No doubt I’m missing something obvious here, but on the surface it looks like a typical government-inspired effort.

  52. “bozone layer.”

    Oh man. I shouldn’t have taken a sip of coffee before reading that…

  53. Outstanding – adding lime or iron filings to the ocean to mitigate atmospheric carbon dioxide content? Do these loons understand that lime is generally produced by heating limestone, thereby driving off CO2 from the carbonate ions? …or that using steel scrap that would otherwise be recycled has the effect of driving the economies of steel production toward using more virgin ore which requires far more energy input and subsequent CO2 production than using recycled steel?

  54. Eh. Been there, done that. It didn’t work out so well.

    But that doesn’t mean I’ll allow you to steal my copyrighted intellectual property, you beatnik hippies! Smithers! Assault them with my walking-stick!

  55. Maybe this is a search for extraterrestrial intelligence project. If there’s anybody out there, they’ll finally have to acknowledge us for flashing them. If you can’t get their attention any other way, annoy them. Being annoying, stupd, self-serving (ASS) human beings is a job the IPCC was made for, by the way.

  56. What such project demands, is the sudden drastic cooldown of northern climes, in order to bring global averages, to what, an elite few, deem an acceptable global temperature.

    Don’t the people, who inhabit these lands, have anything to say about this. Does one really believe Canada, Britain, the Scandinavian countries, Russia, and China will agree to the lowering of their climate. This would put them on the brink of survival. For what?? So that people in Florida and California are slightly more comfortable.

    I think NOT!… Not if they have any living cells within their collective cranium.

    Remember, we are not really talking about world sacrifice, but a northern one. GK

  57. But the newspaper reported that scientists admit that even if the ideas theoretically work, they could cause irreversible consequences.

    But these irreversible consequences benefits are really only more evidence of “ecological overshoot”, the very expensive and unsustainable “mad scientist” niche. My bid would have been much lower.

  58. Brian Hall says:
    June 17, 2011 at 12:12 am

    I’ve got a little list, and geo-engineers have places of honor on it.
    ==================

    So are you being the Grand Poobah here, or the Lord High Executioner? Are you going to use the list to help jorgekafkazar with the new “bozone layer?”

  59. Painting all of Man’s structures and roadways white, I find this idea amusing. Without actually researching I’m going to make a wild guess that Man’s creations cover less than 1/2 of 1 one thousandth of the Earth’s surface. I’m no IPCC climate scientist, but in my experience it’s hard to have much overall affect on something when you’re manipulating such a miniscule portion.

    Having said that I understand that this white wash could be an effective tool in affecting local surface temperatures in concentrated urban areas or particular edifices. I’m not buying it as a method of combatting so called “global” warming.

  60. jcrabb says:
    June 17, 2011 at 10:08 am
    Hmm, No they haven’t! Pray tell from whence that figure (0.2 w/m2) is derived !

  61. If we destroy the Sun that would solve this darn global warming problem. Let’s figure out ways to free the Earth from orbit.

    I propose using CERNs LHC to fire a Black Hole gun at the Sun until it is disappeared, then fleeing to another — cooler — solar system.

  62. C.A. – wouldn’t it be easier to simply widen our orbit and move further away from the sun?

    Further away = cooler temperatures, AND a longer year! Think of how much more we could get done in a year if we had 15 months instead of 12! Think of how much more tax revenues governments could have if they had five quarters (wait, what…?) for each fiscal year!

    Of course, there might be some unforseen and irreversible “consequences” to all this, but we can just cross those bridges when we get there…

  63. I was more thinking in the lines of VLESC–Very Large Earth to Space Catapult–for free space rides for all green fundamentalists.

  64. Maybe I’m a bit idealistic, but I think geoenginering is something that we can gain from and have to work on. It’ll be a natural step in evolution, by giving us the opportunity of a better control on our environment, if it works, and that could be quite handy. For future generations, maybe terraforming will be the answers to some issues, so we must start somewhere.

  65. That’s the dumbest idea yet. If they put a solar sail in space facing the sun, it will be pushed into the atmosphere. The IPCC probably got this idea from the bright-lights a10:10.

    “That, and the fact that it’s batshit crazy and a powder-keg for priming a global explosion of the law of unintended consequences.” <– LOL, so true.

  66. Since Schneider’s death (who controlled what goes or doesn’t go into the IPCC soup) the IPCC has become a free-for-all for every subsidy-greedy lobbyist of the planet. Needless to say, they won’t get what they want; the Western nations and that abysmal replica of the SU, the EU, are as broke as can be, but still, it’s fun to watch the IPCC going the way of all flesh.

  67. Chris says:
    June 17, 2011 at 2:19 pm
    “Maybe I’m a bit idealistic, but I think geoenginering is something that we can gain from and have to work on. It’ll be a natural step in evolution, by giving us the opportunity of a better control on our environment, if it works, and that could be quite handy. For future generations, maybe terraforming will be the answers to some issues, so we must start somewhere.”

    You’re not idealistic; you’re crazy. The planet is fine. Even with 0.04 (instead of 0.027) % of CO2 in the atmosphere. Why shouldn’t it?

  68. Chris:

    Geoengineering is great! As long as I am in sole charge of it!

    I simply pick a beautiful day… no matter where I am… and geoengineer the rest of the planet to maintain MY ideal conditions, forever. Fantastic! What could possibly be wrong with THAT!

    Where and when do we define an ideal climate to engineer global climate to???

    Would that be ideal for Canada??? For Chile?? For Greenland? GK

  69. 1. Buildings are but a tiny fraction of the surface of the earth. Look at satellite imagery and notice just how much one must zoom in before even seeing structures.

    All geo-engineering ‘solutions’ have scale problems.

    2. Most shingles already contain reflective materials. How much difference will the metal make? Besides there is probably not a need to be any more reflective than natural greenery.

    The potential is a reduction of 0.01-0.19 W/m2. See link below.

    3. Sun-baked metal gets seriously hot and conducts that heat, requiring more insulation.

    I’m afraid you are wrong. A low albedo material like tile gets hotter and radiates more heat down into the roof space of a home.

    4. The blinding light from shiny surfaces, especially near freeways, can be dangerous. This was a lesson learned by a local restaurant that had to coat or etch the metal to make it less reflective.

    Perhaps 30% of homes here in Perth have reflective metal roofs and I’ve never heard reflected light as a problem.

    5. With age and exposure, reflective surfaces do not retain reflective properties too long. And, there are more important uses for water than roof cleaning.

    This may have been true of older materials but modern materials don’t lose their reflectivity significantly. Nor surprisingly does lack of cleaning significantly decrease reflectivity. Natural rainfall will clean roofs often enough in most locations.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cool_roof

    The main disadvantage of reflective roofs is in cool climates where the reduction in heat transferred to the building requires more heating.

  70. We need to recognize that the IPCC’s geoengineering requires international cooperation which they describe as an international regime which protects its interests and constrains the actions of others.

    Aha, they are back to forming a one-world government, particularly as they also include in their thinking the idea that all individuals have to be involved in this effort. Of course, that means that they will be encouraged or forced, as needed, to cooperate.

  71. In one of the statements, they want to deal with atmospheric CO2 removal, disposing of it in one or all of 3 ways.
    Physical: injecting it into the oceans.
    Chemical: making the oceans more alkaline to promote carbonate formation.
    Biological: fertilize the oceans to promote biological activity.

    All of these are either just plain stupid or they will do inordinate damage, not even considering the unforeseen unintentional consequences.

    Alkalizing the oceans? Really? After all of the noise about a tiny bit of potential, as yet undetected, acidification? Now they want to kill the oceans as photosynthetic activity already raises body of seawater above 10 during the day—they want to make it higher! Welcome to the Drano Sea.

    Fertilizing the oceans. Talk about messing with the ecology. The mere suggestion of this should drive the environmentalists crazy!

  72. Put away your preonceptions, follow the link to the Telegraph, from there to the Guardian, and on to the keynote paper itself. Then, read it! You may be surprised. But if you haven’t read it, or at least looked at it, don’t think you know what it is about.

  73. I would dearly like to see someone credible WUWT do a full article / report on what the IPCC is up to with geoengineering. Obviously there is money to be made from this as well as ‘control’. I am trying to get the word out, but alas is is being mocked as ‘garbage’ similar to crop circles, aliens and contrails…..
    ANYONE out there who is interested in the history of this?

    http://justmeint.wordpress.com/2011/06/17/lima-peru-june-20-22nd-2011-ipcc-on-geoengineering/

  74. Jimbo says:
    June 17, 2011 at 3:44 am

    ——————————————-
    LazyTeenager says:
    June 17, 2011 at 12:55 am
    ………………..
    The whole debate about geoengineering has been on a while so I can’t understand how the WUWT readership missed it.
    ——————————————–

    Jimbo says————-
    If you were not so lazy you would find that your statement is wrong. See here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here. There are more geoengineering stories on WUWT.
    ———————————–

    BAZINGA!!!!!!!

  75. John B (June 17, 2011 at 6:50 pm), you direct us to a series of abstracts generically entitled IPCC Expert Meeting on Geoengineering Lima, Peru 2011, which I had previously read.

    From Keynote 1 we get “I will show examples of the use of climate models and process models to understand the science and technology needed to do SRM (Solar Radiation Management) research, and outline the conclusions resulting from the use of those models.”

    The rest of the papers appear to take the results of the first as a given and content themselves with championing one geoengineering method over another or discussing the technicalities, economics (SRM is cheap they say), the politics of risk and the governance of geoengineering.

    Keynote 2 does talks of unintended consequences but concludes “all these proposed techniques should be considered”

    I see nothing from the commentators above which indicate a lack of a full and proper understanding of what is at stake.

    I will therefore stick to my original comment. IPCC – aerosols – and flying ones at that!

  76. Using the forcing from those last IPCC crazy ideas and some made-up reconstructions as input data, I ran my bug-free-real-time computer model, which resulted in this prediction: on the next IPCC report, the ultimate AGW solution will be presented: blasting all the world’s nukes (no more nukes around yay!), terminating all life in Earth (no more CO2 emission yay!) and setting a nuclear winter (all temperatures will drop yay!). /sarc?

  77. Far from being “scifi”, all activities of the IPCC’s Working Group 3 are – and always have been – predicated on promotion of geoengineering the global temperature.

    Richard
    from what I have read Richard I have to agree with you. However as you have already shown many people ‘out there’ believe geoengineering is all suff and nonsense sci fi fantasy eytc. As it has already been banned (gulp) is will never happen.

    Haven’t we learned anything yet from all of this – like something as basic as follow the dollar. The AGW train is so well stacked now it will be almost impossible to slow it down – a full derailment is what is require. Geoengineering concepts and planning has been in the pipeline for over 60 years. An enormous amout of money has gone into research and development. The Peru meeting will only pull loose ends together… wait and see.

  78. the IPCC will, for the first time, assess geoengineering in view of risks, feasibility, mitigation potential, costs and governance requirements in its Fifth Assessment Report to be published in 2013/2014. In preparation for this, the three IPCC Working Groups are organizing an Expert Meeting to provide a platform for exchange and discussion among scientists from the different disciplines and to encourage more research on the implications of various geoengineering technologies as well as their potential impacts on biodiversity, human society, and the climate system.

    http://www.ipcc-wg3.de/Members/edenhofer/in-the-media/25-november-2010-nature-correspondence-assessing-geoengineering-doesn2019t-mean-recommending-geoengineering

  79. ETC Group on Geoengineering Developments and How to Take Action
    There are three important new developments on geoengineering (large-scale intentional manipulation of the Earth systems in an attempt to affect the climate) that we we like to bring to your attention. What has long been lurking in the shadows of climate negotiations as a wealthy country Plan B has all of a sudden come front and center. We urge you to pay attention to these developments and intervene where you can.

    this is an interesting article worth reading is you are skeptical of the geoengineering ‘hype’

    http://climate-connections.org/2011/06/08/etc-group-on-geoengineering-developments-and-how-to-take-action/

  80. I said follow the dollar……
    The organizing committee of the meeting includes prominent proponents of geoengineering such as American scientist Ken Caldeira, and Canadians David Keith (University of Calgary) and Jason Blackstock (CIGI) and the topics up for discussion include governance and social, economic and legal aspects of the question. Keith and Caldeira were instrumental in the Royal Society report on goengineering and both testified before Congress and the UK House of Commons in favour of more research. They both have patents pending, as you can see from the ETC Group report Geopiracy and are involved in a wide variety of initiatives on geoengineering.
    -
    They co-manage Bill Gate’s private geoengineering fund of $4.6 million. Jason Blackstock was recently described in the Canadian Walrus Magazine as “a young scholar with an almost luminous sense of self-confidence”. He was the main author of the peculiar Novim report on stratospheric aerosols and has been involved in getting prestigous mainstream foreign policy outfits involved in geoengineering in the UK, Canada and US . Blackstock is also slated to speak on a panel about geoengineering organized by the Canadian embassy (!) in Sao Paulo Brazil, 16 June 2011.

    http://climate-connections.org/2011/06/08/etc-group-on-geoengineering-developments-and-how-to-take-action/

  81. If we plan on sending stuff up into orbit, we may as well make sure that it generates something of real value (electricity). I haven’t heard anything on space-based power systems in ages, why not? This would take care of all of our concerns, from carbon to limits on fossil supplies.

    http://www.nss.org/settlement/ssp/index.htm

  82. This is why we have to win our fight against the hysteria, winning in public so that very few people exist who believe it any more.

    If we do not handle this hysteria, action will be taken on it. Already, the world’s economy is collapsing from anti-carbon action. But its ecosystems will collapse too, if belief in warmism goes on much longer. These strategies will be implemented, and real climate change will occur. It may not be easy to recover from.

  83. This is the most awesome post you’ve ever posted! No unintended consequences from dumping 30 gigatons of fossil CO2 per year? No unintended consequences from increasing the atmospheric concentration 35%?

  84. I’m so totally confused. How can we have any unintended consequential effect on the climate via sulfates and mirrors if we can’t have any unintended consequential effect on the climate via dumping 30 Billion tons of fossil carbon per year? You need to stop and explain the detailed science behind your reasoning.

  85. anderlan says:

    “I’m so totally confused.”

    We can see that. But don’t worry, we’re here to help.

    First, you’re frightening yourself by using those big, scary numbers. CO2 is only 0.00039 of the air. And there has been no global harm observed due to adding more of this beneficial trace gas. If there were “unintended consequences”, don’t you think there would be at least a little evidence of a problem by now? But there is no such evidence. None. The only result of the added CO2 is increased agricultural productivity.

    Conclusion: CO2 is harmless and beneficial. More is better.

    Don’t worry, be happy!☺

  86. Thankyou . . . . Smokey!!!

    And when the article says: . . . “scientists admit that even if the ideas theoretically work, they could cause irreversible consequences” . . . . Code for: more research funding please . . . In my opinion . . .

  87. Instead of wasting money on STUPID mirrors why not use that money to buy all the worlds tropical forest and KEEP it protected? that might just help keep the climate under control, you know, the natural way

  88. Climate change, Volcanoes, Earthquakes, Floods, Droughts, Tsunamis, Tornado’s, Hurricanes, Blizzards, Mudslides, and even Asteroids . . . have been a matter of living or dying since time began . . . . that is the natural way! Buying all the worlds tropical forests will not stop the above . . . We have never had a perfect . . . “climate” all over earth! Only in certain places that were bought up along time ago! And even those places will not stay perfect “forever”!

  89. I have an idea. Instead of buying, selling, and trading ever more abstract concepts of “carbon credits” or “green” nonsense, or spending endless resources on dubious and destructive schemes like spraying us to death with chemical aerosols daily, or dumping more crap in the oceans, how bout we plant more TREES? Remember trees? Those shade-spreading, life-giving, food-producing, CO2 exchanging, long-living, sustainably pleasant miracles of nature? Jus sayin…

  90. MSW;
    natural reforestation of abandoned marginal farmland has been going on since the West was opened and the hardscrabble landholders gratefully fled to the deep topsoils of the plains. There’s more tree cover in the US now than since the Pilgrims landed.

Comments are closed.