Guest essay by Eric Worrall
Climate scientists are hoping the leaders of poor countries desperate to stop their people suffering climate hardship will fund their stratospheric sulphate injection experiments.
Rich countries aren’t stopping climate change. Can poor nations save themselves?
By James Griffiths, CNN
Updated 0159 GMT (0959 HKT) September 10, 2019CNN)
Tall and stony-faced, with a long and bitter history of fighting for democracy, Tongan leader Akilisi Pōhiva is not someone you’d expect to break down in tears at an intergovernmental summit.At a meeting of Pacific leaders last month in the tiny island nation of Tuvalu, other attendees saidPōhiva was overcome with emotion as he tried to secure Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison’s support for a more forceful approach to tackling the climate crisis.
…
Should developing countries take action?
So far, efforts to tackle the climate crisis have largely focused on international agreements to reduce emissions, ones that have been — by and large — profoundly unsuccessful in doing so.
While the most effective way of lowering global temperatures is to reduce emissions, this is something that requires a global response, unlike some geoengineering methods which could be carried out — at least in theory — by a single country or group of countries.
“Unfortunately, the most environmentally responsible way is also the most politically difficult,” Ken Caldeira, a climate scientist at the Carnegie Institution for Science, said last year. “If there’s a leader of a country whose people are starving, and they think by injecting some particles in the stratosphere they can feed their people and alleviate suffering, the political pressure to do that is going to be intense.“
Read more: https://edition.cnn.com/2019/09/09/health/climate-change-geoengineering-asia-intl-hnk/index.html
…
It seems implausible that leaders of poor countries will obtain the cash to fund a major geoengineering experiment, but what would happen if they did?
The result could be a global catastrophe. A study of natural sulphate injection events, volcanic eruptions, made the surprising discovery that plants need sunlight. Injecting sulphate into the atmosphere crashes crop yields.
Estimating global agricultural effects of geoengineering using volcanic eruptions
Published: 08 August 2018
Jonathan Proctor, Solomon Hsiang, Jennifer Burney, Marshall Burke & Wolfram SchlenkerSolar radiation management is increasingly considered to be an option for managing global temperatures, yet the economic effects of ameliorating climatic changes by scattering sunlight back to space remain largely unknown. Although solar radiation management may increase crop yields by reducing heat stress, the effects of concomitant changes in available sunlight have never been empirically estimated. Here we use the volcanic eruptions that inspired modern solar radiation management proposals as natural experiments to provide the first estimates, to our knowledge, of how the stratospheric sulfate aerosols created by the eruptions of El Chichón and Mount Pinatubo altered the quantity and quality of global sunlight, and how these changes in sunlight affected global crop yields. We find that the sunlight-mediated effect of stratospheric sulfate aerosols on yields is negative for both C4 (maize) and C3 (soy, rice and wheat) crops. Applying our yield model to a solar radiation management scenario based on stratospheric sulfate aerosols, we find that projected mid-twenty-first century damages due to scattering sunlight caused by solar radiation management are roughly equal in magnitude to benefits from cooling. This suggests that solar radiation management—if deployed using stratospheric sulfate aerosols similar to those emitted by the volcanic eruptions it seeks to mimic—would, on net, attenuate little of the global agricultural damage from climate change. Our approach could be extended to study the effects of solar radiation management on other global systems, such as human health or ecosystem function.
Read more: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-018-0417-3
I’m really concerned about the stratospheric sulphate injection idea, its unlikely that anyone will attempt this at sufficient scale to cause problems, but people shouldn’t even be trying to do this; the consequences of injecting sulphate on a large scale seem far worse than any “damage” which might accrue from a degree or two of warming.
Reminds me of old Popular Science or Popular Mechanics suggested proposals. Almost non ever came to pass.
Old Dick Tracy comics were better predictors but I am still waiting for an anti gravity machine.
I am betting that virtually none of the readers out there are old enough to understand what I am talking about and internet searches are likely to be unproductive.
As a youngster and aspiring scientist/engineer I would pour over these magazines and marvel at the interesting stuff they propounded. Then I went to MIT and became educated in real physics, real science and real engineering. Once my ignorance had been dispelled, I rolled my eyes at the naiveté and ignorance displayed by these “bell-the-cat” proposals (the kid of proposals that are summarily disposed of as soon as somebody asks, “How are you going to do that?”)
Some of Dick Tracy’s gadgets have come to pass: wrist communicators. Many have not, such as the antigravity buckets they flew about in. Sadly nobody will ever be marrying a Moon Maid. (cute antennas though) There, you’ve lost your bet.
I remember, though I had forgotten about the anti-gravity, personal flying platform.
There was a 1957 Popular Science (mechanics?) TV show that I rented from BlockBusters a couple of decades ago. It highlighted futuristic concepts researchers were developing. I showed it to my research group to keep them grounded when blue-skying new concepts. Not only did none of the research come to fruition, some of ideas had become absurd in the face of things that were developed.
I hope it will only take a few more years until everyone finds this whole topic absurd.
“climate scientists” are shameless fraudsters. If they can’t get money out of rich countries they go after poor countries.
Well, they get a platform from CNN and their ilk to rant nonsense, but unfortunately this is not a revenue generating activity
That isn’t actually what the purpose of this plan is. They know global warming isnt panning out to be a problem. They want to do something like this so that even with global warming not going to be a crisis anyway, they can credit geoengineering for ‘preventing’ warming, flooding, drought, etc. and not be blamed for the horrible costly damages and deaths that their actions and hysteria have already caused.
There is no real evidence that “sulfate aerosols” would actually have any influence outside of causing acid rain.
Satellite measurements of ground temperatures in the IR are not corrected for “sulfate aerosols,” and these aerosols are nothing but an escape hatch for “climatologists” to climb out of when CO2 in the air isn’t doing what it’s “supposed to do.”
““If there’s a leader of a country whose people are starving, and they think by injecting some particles in the stratosphere they can feed their people and alleviate suffering, the political pressure to do that is going to be intense.“
Ummmm…..Less sunlight=less plant growth=less food ! D’OH !
We have been geoengineering our planet since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution, when we began introducing SO2 aerosols from the burning of fossil into our atmosphere.
By the mid-1970’s, they had increased so much that their cooling effect led to fears of a return to the Little Ice
Then, due to global Clean Air efforts, we began removing SO2 aerosols from the atmosphere, and temperatures naturally warmed up, as they HAD to (the actual cause of all of the anomalous warming that has occurred since the late 1970’s).
So, we have been there, done that.
Thus, the judicious re-introduction of SO2 aerosols into the atmosphere is all that is needed to restore Earth’s temperatures to more a more benign level. However, this re-introduction might need to be partially reversed, whenever a VEI4 or larger volcanic eruption occurs.
(Their introduction cannot be used as a weapon, since any increased levels are quickly distributed around the globe, affecting global temperatures everywhere)
So, we have been there, done that.
How do you know that? Where are the measurements?
…affecting global temperatures everywhere
Because it cannot be anything else?
Ranier:
We know from Plinian volcanic eruptions of at least VEI4 intensity that their injection of SO2 into the stratosphere will cause some temporary global cooling, as their SO2 aerosols circulate around the Earth.
And when they eventually settle out, temperatures recover to pre-eruption levels because of the cleansed atmosphere.
Anthropogenic SO2 aerosol emissions into the Troposphere have the same effect, causing cooling as they increase, and warming if their levels decrease, as happened due to global Clean Air efforts.
Anthropogenic SO2 aerosol emissions for the the years 1750 -2014 are available on-line:
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-11-369-2018-supplement
This is the data which answers your ‘”Where are the measurements?” question.
A few examples: 1850: 2.4 Megatons
1900: 21
1950: 50
1975: 126
2000: 109
2010: 113
2018: 80 (est.)
Thanks, will look into it.
BTW, wind cools the objects it hits by more evaporation. Wind turbines slow down wind. Ergo windmills heat the climate.
Ranier:
I have found a new data set of graphs which show annual SO2 emissions by country for the years 2005-2018, which shows the reduction in SO2 aerosol emissions due to global clean air efforts.
Google “Total Aerosol Emissions by country-so2.gsfc.nasa.gov”
(As I have repeatedly stated, when SO2 aerosol emissions are reduced, temperatures naturally rise because of the cleaner air, the cause of all of the anomalous warming since circa 1975 ).
“While the most effective way of lowering global temperatures is to reduce emissions, ” [James Griffiths, CNN, 2019]
I guess the statement is by James G., although not unique to him, it is still a WAG. And wrong.
Cute drawing with the volcano, ship, and balloon:
The artist takes liberty with scale.
Note the palm tree equates with the tropics where the Stratosphere is at about 45,000 feet (~13,700 m.).
The palm tree looks to be about 1/3 of that, or 15,000 feet tall. About 4,600 meters.
Would the coconuts be the size of the RMS Titanic?
Seriously, climate alarmists seem not to understand the concept of scale. Whether the land for solar or the number of wind turbines, never do alarmists show the numbers to bring such sources of electricity to replacing coal, gas, and hydro.
Caldeira: ““If there’s a leader of a country whose people are starving, and they think by injecting some particles in the stratosphere they can feed their people and alleviate suffering,…”
That must be a modern version of the Cargo Cult. Which has come back to roost, it may seem , originating in those same Pacific islands (that are still not under water):
“A cargo cult is a belief system among members of a relatively undeveloped society in which adherents practice superstitious rituals hoping to bring modern goods supplied by a more technologically advanced society. These cults, millenarian in nature, were first described in Melanesia in the wake of contact with advanced Western cultures. The name derives from the belief which began among Melanesians in the late 19th and early 20th centuries that various ritualistic acts such as the building of an airplane runway will result in the appearance of material wealth, particularly highly desirable Western goods (i.e., “cargo”), via Western airplanes.”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cargo_cult
“Climate Scientists Look to Poor Countries to Fund Geoengineering”
Silly gween wabbits, don’t they know that the “poor countries” only supported all these dumb ideas because they expected to get money, not give it ! lol
What exactly are these poor people suffering from Re: the climate? No more bad weather than during other climate optimums, and far less suffering than during the 1.5 C cooler and “famine plagued” LIA.
I cannot believe how docile the population is in the face of this very divisive propaganda. Every story reported by the MSM is either hyped-up (leftward) or a flat out lie.
Fortunately, the population is also not mobilized at all in the fight against a Climate problem that’s supposedly gonna kill everyone.
The odds of counting the hurricane deaths as climate CRISIS .? Started in ernest just since this one that scrubed bahamas.sitting is new.
Just because someone can draw a cartoon of the setup doesn’t mean its engineering feasible until actual engineering is done.
Given that the tether-hose to the ballon would be at least 12,000 meters if it were directly vertical to reach the bottom of the stratosphere, I wonder if anyone has actually done the engineering calculation on that setup?
Some items: Hose inner diameter, gas pressure at bottom of the hose, tensile strength requirements of the tether, flow rates to deliver the SO2 in quantity needed for a the needed aerosol effect, hose-tether weight the balloon would have to suspend, then how big the balloon would have to be using helium or hydrogen gas. Then from balloon size the expected maximum wind forces on the balloon, then working that back down to size the tether, and then the tether weight again to size the balloon.
I have my doubts a balloon big enough to suspend 12,000 meters of sizable hose-tether to deliver the necessary flow rate of SO2 is engineering possible. And the tension on the hose-tether would be sizable if the big balloon were experiencing windshears and wind at altitude.
But I’m not a balloon engineer.
Hold on thar! We were forced to reduce sulphur emissions because of ‘disastrous’ acid rain. Coal fired electrical generation had to end, to ‘save the planet’.
Now we ‘need’ to add sulphur to the atmosphere to ‘save the planet’? Fire up the coal boilers, Boys! We’re back in business! We produce 24/7/365 reliable, low cost, dispatchable electricity and we save the planet as a by product!!!
This is analogous to regulating and taxing cigarettes out of business because they were unhealthy… and then creating and taxing new unhealthy smoking industries (marijuana, vaping, etc.) because governments needed to replace the ‘lost’ tax revenues. It’s environMental schizophrenia…..
“Fire up the coal boilers, Boys!”
Lol ! Good one, J Mac. Ironic, isn’t it. 🙂
CO2 is bad
SO2 is good.
Stop the world, I want to get off.
Four days ago Bill Gates came out with his latest proposal for geoengineering. Several links on Google can be found here, as well as links to his earlier proposals:
https://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=%22Bill+Gates%22+geoengineering&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8
We do not know what the optimal global climate really is let alone how to achieve it. Extreme weather events are part of the current climate and of every climate regime that we know of, so changing the global climate will not get rid of extreme weather events. The normal state of the Earth is not to have polar caps or low altitude glaciers which implies higher sea levels then we have today. The next ice age will cause sea levels to lower at the cost of ice sheets forming on North America and Eurasia. The next ice age will probably inconvenience more people than it will help so I believe that most of Mankind will want to enjoy the current interglacial period for as long as possible. Adding particulate pollution to the atmosphere may be detrimental to all. The possibility of human caused climate change can be gotten rid of via the forced extinction of mankind but mass suicide may not be too popular in many human communities.
I have a real problem in any organization thinking they have the power to inject some crap or other into the atmosphere to solve a totally none-existing issue. If they can do that so casually why are they so adamant about not allowing ocean enrichment with iron oxides to increase the plankton population, the bottom of the food chain, to allow increased population at every level of the food chain to allow increased seafood catches? Zubrin reported on the British Columbia experiment where a “rogue” greenie dropped over a 100 tons of oxide, and the year after they had the largest salmon catch in living memory. There were other experiments off the Galapagos which were also positive for increased plankton population. The food chain simply consists of the eaters and the eaten. Increase the population at any level in the food chain and the levels above flourish. There is zero value in spending money to decrease solar intensity locally. Buy some sunscreen.
Crocodile tears?
Since, his island is growing, not shrinking or getting washed away, Akilisi has to resort to emotional disturbance to obtain some of the huge amounts of money alarmists promised.
Reducing emissions is NOT “the most effective way of lowering global temperatures”, it is the most ineffective and most expensive, while geo-engineering is the most effective and least expensive, according to the IPCC (high agreement!), only around USD 10 billion/year.
And according to a recent study, photosynthesis increased by more than 50% since the start of industrialization due to CO2 fertilization. Reduction of sun light is very small compared with this effect.
https://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2019-05/jcu-hpa050919.php
The fair treatment of unborn children is ignored for
Financial concerns good that jesus is judge.we toast anyhow
The odds of counting the hurricane deaths as climate CRISIS .? Started in ernest just since this one that scrubed bahamas.sitting is new.
Ranier:
I have found a new data set of graphs which show annual SO2 emissions by country for the years 2005-2018, which shows the reduction in SO2 aerosol emissions due to global clean air efforts.
Google “Total Aerosol Emissions by country-so2.gsfc.nasa.gov”
(As I have repeatedly stated, when SO2 aerosol emissions are reduced, temperatures naturally rise because of the cleaner air, the cause of all of the anomalous warming since circa 1975 ).
Moderator: Why am I being told that this is a duplicate comment? This is new information for Ranier Bensch