Last June, WIRED magazine wrote an in depth article that asked:
Can a Million Tons of Sulfur Dioxide Combat Climate Change?
The question arose from research from research at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory near San Francisco, by Lowell Wood, a protégé of the brilliant and controversial hydrogen bomb inventor Edward Teller. The idea was simple: Inject sulfur dioxide into the stratosphere to reflect a portion of the sun’s rays back into space, thus cooling the planet. It also seemed to be within the realm of possibility to some.
Here is how it works:
Graphic and text below adapted from Wired magazine article
1. Make sulfur dioxide
A million tons of sulfur dioxide would be needed to begin the cooling process. Luckily SO2, a byproduct of coal-burning power plants, is a common industrial chemical.
2. Inject it into the stratosphere
Load the sulfur dioxide into aircraft — converted 747s, military fighters, or even large balloons — and carry it up to the stratosphere. This will cost about $1 billion a year.
3. Wait for the chemical reaction
In a series of reactions, sulfur dioxide combines with other molecules in the atmosphere, ultimately forming sulfuric acid. This H2SO4 binds to water to form aerosol droplets that absorb and reflect back into space 1 to 3 percent of the sun’s rays. (The particles also contribute to the depletion of the ozone layer, but scientists are researching alternate chemicals.)
4. Let the planet cool
Results will be quick, especially over the Arctic.
And just a few days ago, over a million tons of sulfur dioxide (SO2) was in fact injected into the atmosphere over the Pacific Ocean, here is a satellite sounder derived image of the cloud that has been released:
Source: AVO
The Terra/MODIS satellite snapped a nice image of the release, notice the obvious brown trail as the plume becomes airborne over the Pacific ocean:
Source: NASA
Here is a photo of where the experiment took place:
The Kasatochi volcano as seen from space, and location map below:
Thanks to a posting on another wordpress blog called “eruptions” we have this insight from Dr. Simon Carn from the University of Maryland in Baltimore:
“The August 7-8 eruption of Kasatochi volcano (Aleutian Islands)produced a very large stratospheric SO2 cloud – possibly the largest since the August 1991 eruption of Hudson (Chile). Preliminary SO2 mass calculations using Ozone Monitoring Instrument (OMI) data suggest a total SO2 burden of ~1.5 Tg. This figure will be revised in the coming weeks but is more likely to go up than down. The SO2 cloud has drifted over a large area of North America and is now (August 14) reaching Europe.“
With the released SO2 at ~ 1.5 Tg (Teragrams, a unit of mass approximately equal to one megaton) this is actually 50% more than mass in the experiment proposed by Wood and Teller.
For those wishing to follow the plume, NOAA offers a website that tracks SO2 in the atmosphere here. You can also keep tabs on the eruption and plume at the Alaska Volcano Observatory.
With this eruption coming on the heels of a short term global cooling trend that we’ve seen in the last 18 months, it will be interesting to see if this real-world experiment being performed by nature will add to the trend we’ve already seen.
Click for a larger image
Reference: UAH lower troposphere data
This type of “experiment” has already been seen before in recent times, as the Wired article mentions:
Pinatubo’s eruption didn’t just unleash huge mud slides and lava flows; it also fired an ash stream 22 miles into the air, injecting 20 million tons of sulfur dioxide into the stratosphere. Over the following months, a massive haze gradually dispersed across the globe. Meanwhile, the sulfur dioxide component underwent chemical reactions to form a particulate known as sulfate aerosol (in essence, droplets of water and sulfuric acid), which absorbs sunlight and reflects some of it back into space.
The climatic effect of this volcanic eruption was rapid, dramatic, and planetary in scale. In a year, the global average temperature declined by half a degree Celsius, and researchers observed less summer melt atop the Greenland ice sheet.
An interesting passage in the article on SO2 injection suggests:
Until large-scale experiments are funded, the only way to explore the potential consequences is through computer simulations. By turning down the virtual sun or cranking up the digital carbon, we can create any planetary future we want.
It looks like nature has stepped up and eliminated that need for computer simulation.
Based on Carn’s estimate, when the data is all in on Kasatochi, it will likely be about 10 times less than Pinatubo in total mass of SO2 ejected. But we’ll watch, measure, and see what this smaller event does for our global climate. Unfortunately, most any global cooling we see in the next couple of years, no matter what the true cause of it is, will probably be labeled as “volcanically induced” due to this event.
h/t to Philip_B for comments that lead to this article’s creation
UPDATE: 8/19/08 10:20 AM PST There has some been some questions in comments as to whether or not the plume reached stratospheric levels. This press release from USGS notes that the plume has reached more than 35,000 feet altitude, which would put the plume into the lower stratosphere.
If the AGW crowd is serious, then let them agitate for nuclear power plants and prove that they are not against progress. I believe though that they are afraid of progress.
Nature conveniently provides a cherry for the AGW crowd to pick.
We’ll see how big the cherry grows, a blip on the Radar or a full page in the following IPCC Report.
Forget the political stuff, I remember the winter of 92-93, I was a senior in High School back then and it was cold, real cold. The day before Thanksgiving Break, I recall driving my Corsica to school and by lunch enough snow had fallen to cover the hood. An impressive feat considering that I do in Texas.
Autumn has aleady arrived in the Texas Panhandle like Denver, we are experiencing record cool temperatures. With the addition of this volcanic eruption I am really worried about what this coming winter will bring. Is it going to be 92-93 all over again, or are we going to experience the joys of what my dad used to call the Blizzard of 1955, when millions of head of cattle froze to death across Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas and New Mexico?
Anyhow, I hope those windfarm engineers considered the fact that the Texas Panhandle can (and does) turn into the Canadian Arctic sometimes, and the fact that we are the “Saudi Arabia of Wind” does come at the expense of some really miserable weather including but not limited to, annual tornados, straightline winds that can exceed 100MPH, sub zero (F) blizzard conditions with winds exceeding 50MPH, Ice Storms, and heavy snows.
The 1991 eruption caused a cooling of about 0.7 C by the Winter of 92-93, given that that was an El Nino year with a positive PDO, and the expectation of NOAA seems to be ENSO neutral, with a chance of La Nina conditions reforming by late Winter/ Early Spring. Combined with a cooling Atlantic, I think that we are in for a wild ride come late fall.
My question is how cold is it going to get?
All you have to do is look back in history at the effect of some of the largest eruptions. Mother earth does not care one bit about you, your children or your grandchildern.
http://www.history-magazine.com/volcanoes.html
“Unfortunately, most any global cooling we see in the next couple of years, no matter what the true cause of it is, will probably be labeled as “volcanically induced” due to this event.”
That can be prevented(partly) by beeing one step ahead.
– Try to figure out who or what organisations that would possibly contribute cooling or lack of warming the next few years to this volcano.
– Get a forecast of global temperaratures for the next years from those persons/organisations that also explains why the temperature will be as they predict. What forcings will there be that will affect temperatures up and down?
– Wait 2 years, watch them fail with their predictions. Enjoy.
If they know what effect this volcano will have on earths temperature given a certain amount of sulfur they should be able to predict global temperatures the next years. We know that this volcano eruption has happened so if they know what affects our climate they can add this volcanos negative feedback and predict global temperatures given this new information, or maybe not.
In order to be able to tell how much this eruption affects temperature they must have full control of other forcings otherwise they wont be able to tell what forcing that is actually causing the cooling.
I mean, they can’t say we dont know how much factor X is and only know partly how much facor Z is but we are certain that factor Y is the reason.
It’s a bummer that Mother Nature has taken AGW ‘s side by giving them an excuse for any near term temperature declines.
“Unfortunately, most any global cooling we see in the next couple of years, no matter what the true cause of it is, will probably be labeled as “volcanically induced” due to this event.”
SO2 concentration above Antarctica has a wierd pinwheel look. Watt’s up with that?
REPLY: yes I noted that also, but don’t have time at the moment to investigate it.
To change some thing is to assume you know what that thing is. To presume we fully understand the workings of the climate systems that make up what we think of as the global climate is preposterous and just asking for trouble. What happens if an action was taken and the result was catastrophic heat or cold in a particular area of the world and many thousands died as a result? Can you imagine the lawsuits, the international rancor and hostilities that could erupt from playing with a system you don’t fully understand? In software testing, developers usually tell testers two things: “It works on my machine.” (They have a controlled and insular environment.) and “That couldn’t possibly happen.” And guess what? The latter statement is often shown to be false as not all of the possibilities have been thought through. And we also don’t see unintended consequences. I guess we never learn from the Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein fable.
I think that this is a great idea.
Here in Wisconsin I make a skating rink in my back yard for my kids but I don’t always have the right weather conditions.
This way I can have my skating rink all year ’round!
We are fortunate. Normally, this event would have been in addition to significant sulfur oxides from China. However, due to the Olympics, that output has been artificially low since mid July. Had this occurred earlier in the year, we’d really be crying now.
So, we’ve actually measured the cooling effects of having massive amounts of SO2 dumped into the air by volcanoes. Has the opposite effect ever been documented where massive amounts of CO2 pumped into the air by fires led to warming effects?
This will be interesting to watch for effects. OT: Anthony, found this on CA, some comments re: mercury vs remote electronic sensing by someone keeping records for 30+ years:
http://herald-progress.com/news/view_sections.asp?idcategory=49&idarticle=2375
Regarding dispersal: I would imagine this event comes at one of the more opportune times in the year for dispersal now as we are headed towards fall and fall in the northern hemisphere brings increased mixing from northern lattitudes to southern lattitudes. I’m no meteorologist, but having lived in the Midwest all my life and watching the fall weather September-December brings cold fronts from the north swinging the jet stream to the south and warm-fronts and intense lows from the south (http://www.menet.umn.edu/pressure/weather.html – see 1998 “land tropical storm”). Sounds like a good way to get the atmosphere mixed up.
That’s a big volcanic plume. I suppose the reason the eruption didn’t get much media coverage is that it’s in such an isolated part of the world.
Wondered why it got so suddenly cool and cloudy on Vancouver Island in the middle of August.
Leif, not a big enough effect to take the minimizing sun off the hook. But it will be blamed for the survival of the Baby Ice. I’m convinced enough of the quiescent sun and the flipped PDO that we will have cooling long after the effects of this nicely timed experiment are collected and analyzed.
=======================================
As I recall the government spent a half a billion dollars studying acid rain with the results being inconclusive with respect to coal burning power plants.
The only cost effective way to put large quantities of SO2 into the troposphere is to bomb volcanoes with precision guided bunker busters. Well place bombs could start eruptions. Let nature do the rest.
Seriously, the only way this wrong headed project can be stopped is by suing the primary government agencies involved for NEPA violations and other applicable federal laws. I am reasonably certain that a public interest non-profit law firm, such as the Pacific Legal Foundation, would be interested in litigation of this kind.
By borrowing a page from the Enviros, a success full suit could result in permanent injunctions to stop the boondoggle. Legal fees by a successful litigant are also recoverable. This is how organizations like the Sierra Club Defense Fund obtain much of its operating capital. For example, the spotted owl litigation made them millions.
It is amazing how hubris of some scientists and engineers drives them to attempt to interfere with or control natural processes in order to achieve some self-perceived benefits. They always screw up. For example, the Corps of Engineers has destroyed more wetlands and riparian systems with its flood control projects than all of the this nations property developers combined. Their Mississippi River projects are a prime example.
This story has two sides to it. I remember reading an article that said Europe has warmed because of cleaner air. The cleaner air results in less particulate matter therefore there are less condensation nuclei…hence…There are less clouds, letting more sunlight through. So actually pollution (Including this) can somewhat be a good thing because it lets a smaller amount of light through which regulates temperatures so they don’t go to high.
This can also have a bad side. If you release a cloud of sulfur and ash over the arctic that ash is going to fall on the ice causing it to blacken which would cause the arctic to melt faster because of the decreased albedo.
SO2 concentration above Antarctica has a wierd pinwheel look. Watt’s up with that?
It matches the continual low pressure systems that circle the Southern Ocean. So it’s probably a precipitation effect.
BTW, Southern Ocean storms are as intense as tropical hurricanes/cyclones. Two weeks ago, one had a central pressure of 928 millibars, the equivalent of a cat 4 hurricane.
Having mastered the problems of war, poverty, ignorance, crime and disease, the Creator now decided that mankind should manage the climate of the earth. NOT!
Re acid rain I thought I’d read that the scientific claim was based on soil sampling of a region later found to be naturally acidic, that the acid rain thing was never factual so much as a big environmental scare about like DDT. Fancy that.
If true then I suppose it’s proper to ask when the enviros have _ever_ been right. They were wrong about DDT, wrong about acid rain, wrong about cancer* and carcinogens, and they’re wrong about the global warming stuff.
(* e.g. it was supposed that cancers were caused by environmental factors, although later research {by skeptics of course} showed that cervical cancer is caused by HPV strains and stomach cancer is caused by a bacteria, Heliobacter Pylori, not stress or something that evil mankind put in the environment. It appears as though _most_ cancers will eventually prove out similarly. This change in thinking has even associated heart disease with oral bacteria rather than dietary fat. It’s not the environment after all.)
An article today shows that the organic food touted by granola munching enviros is _not_ healthier or have more nutrients than conventional food. So I come back to my thesis — have the enviros _ever_ been right about _anything_? I say, resoundingly, NO.
Sanity may yet prevail.
1. The recent scary sounding business trying to implicate cell phones with brain cancers was laughed off by researchers and medical establishments that know what they’re doing. It didn’t even get real legs before it was being taken down.
2. On dot earth even some of the alarmists (at least of those trying to be intellectually honest) are questioning the new CA solar power project by noting (correctly) that it takes more total energy to create and run the proposed PV station than it can produce.
I would have _never_ guessed that I’d see medical specialists taking on cancer scare stories and alarmists writing about total energy budgets on the Revkin blog. This gives me hope that there really is a change underway.
I wonder if the effect of this will be diminished (ie seen as a failure of the WIRED experiment) because this is happening as we approach winter up there and the sun’s angle is lower. The descriptive picture is a bit misleading showing the sun’s rays beaming straight down onto the north pole. High noon!
Re: acid rain
Are you telling me the acid rain threat was exaggerated? Because when I was in 5th grade, I was convinced it was a serious problem. So much so that me and a couple classmates made a little acid rain “rap song” for a school project. Please tell me that was meaningful!
On a more serious note, I shudder to think what children are being taught in elementary school about climate change today. I don’t have any children yet, but I know I would be keeping an eye on that if I were a parent. Of course, I’m aware of this issue. My guess is that 90% of parents just go along with it. Any parents in here run across any interesting reading material/propaganda in their child’s schoolwork?
Wow.
All this time I’ve heard the skeptics objecting to the AGWers that claim ‘the debate is over’… what do I see here, but the skeptics not only writing the reports of a future, hypothetical debate as over, but you’ve supplied both sides of the argument (‘AGW is false’; vs. ‘AGW is true but was overcome by volcanoes’)- which, of course, you’ve handily won. Congratulations on such a hard-won victory, you must be so proud.
I thought I might possibly have found a skeptic site that actually cared about honest debate, but clearly there is little need perceived for that here.
REPLY: Making a blanket assumption from one statement? Hmm. Well you are certainly welcome to debate it. Nobody is shutting debate down.
Spewing a megaton of pollution into the atmosphere – to “begin” the cooling process – is guaranteed to trigger the Law of Unintended Consequences.
If these jamokes could divine the future, they’d be retired in Tahiti. The stock market is a lot less complex than the climate.
Besides, nature is already doing it for us: click