Humanity's failure to reduce carbon emissions is imminent, so many people are beginning to wonder, and then what? geoengineering offers an alternative, not ideal, not even sure if it is right or sufficient, but at least it is viable.

Source

Hi ecotrain friends, I hope you are all very well. Recently the IPCC [international panel for climate change] warned that carbon emission reduction targets must be met by 2025 to avoid a temperature increase of more than 1.5 degrees Celsius to prevent a climate catastrophe, but the pressures on economies around the world due to recent events make many think that this will not be possible. So some experts are already thinking about what to do in a post climate change world, some are looking to one of the most controversial branches of climate science... Geoengineering.

What is geoengineering?.

Basically, it would be the intentional manipulation of the planet's natural cycles on a massive scale to counteract climate change. Modifying the climate of the entire planet by artificial means.

Put this way it sounds like something out of a science fiction movie, and it certainly has its challenges, detractors, and possible unexpected consequences, but before we address those points, let's first talk a bit about how they would accomplish it.

How to modify the climate .

The starting point that opens up the possibility for actions that modify the climate on a global scale is that we've already done it once, and over time we've learned that even seemingly subtle actions can have consequences across the globe. With that knowledge in mind some methods have been devised, all still in the experimental realm, that could modify the climate once again, but this time, with controllable and appropriate results to correct the damage already done by mankind. Some would be.

Reflective Aerosols.

One of the most viable so far, and one of the most discussed is the possibility of dispersing aerosols in the stratosphere with reflective properties to reduce the amount of sunlight reaching the surface of the earth and therefore reduce the amount of heat it receives from the sun, this could mitigate the effects of global warming. However, it could also modify rainfall levels in different regions of the world, leaving some with more or less water...

For such purposes, a fleet of specialized high-altitude aircraft would be needed, for which designs are already available. The fleet would be no larger than those of some air cargo carriers, such as FedEx or UPS. And it would be considerably smaller than those of the major commercial airlines, yet it would have to operate around the globe.

Source

[A very basic sketch that is part of the plans for a prototype designed by former Boeing engineers for a high-altitude reflective aerosol spray aircraft.]

It is necessary to disperse the aerosols in the stratosphere for maximum effect, since in the stratosphere the particles can remain floating for up to 18 months. The required altitude would be about 20,000 meters.

Capture carbon from the air.

This method, which is not yet certain of its feasibility on a large scale, is based on an already proven technology although on a limited scale, carbon capture systems are already used in the chimneys of several factories around the world to reduce the levels of greenhouse gases that are released into the atmosphere, the captured carbon is then injected into the subsoil, this technology is vital if you want to meet the goals of decarbonization. However, if the latter is not possible, a global effort may be needed to broaden the scope of the technology and create huge air purification plants. To remove carbon from the very air we breathe.

Source

Of course, the scale needed would be massive and in the current economic environment, and with depleting resources it is not certain that such an undertaking would be possible, it would require the solution of several technical and cost issues to be possible at present, yet it is a proven technology, so in theory, it could work.

Space mirrors.

Certainly the most fantastic of the possible solutions, to explain it as an operetta supervillain, is to send huge canvases with reflective material into space, approaching the sun, to reflect the light and therefore the heat and prevent it from reaching the earth, being closer to the sun, a relatively small object can cast a large shadow on the planet.

Source

On a purely theoretical level, it could work with the technological progress we currently possess, although it would require a monumental economic effort and many international agreements would have to be reached, something that mankind seems incapable of achieving.

Fertilization of the oceans.

In 2012 a US businessman was accused of Breaking 2 UN conventions concerning climate by throwing 100 tons of iron ore into the ocean, the objective? to prove that iron is a super fertilizer for algae, and that algae, like all plants, absorb Co2, but unlike plants on land these absorb it in much larger quantities, and when they die this goes to the sea floor where it may not see the surface for thousands of years, if ever.

Source

Russ George's experiment was a partial success in demonstrating that iron is indeed a super fertilizer for algae, but it was the theories of scientists like John Martin who proposed that a tremendous algae bloom in the ocean was one of the causes of the last ice age, and proclaimed that a tanker of 10,000 tons of iron could cause a new ice age.

Cloud seeding.

A theoretically simple method, but with potentially serious side effects and complicated application, would be to evaporate water from the oceans to create clouds, which would reduce the amount of solar radiation reaching the earth.

Source

The technology exists, the advances in automation, navigation, and power generation present on a Ford-class super carrier used by the U.S. Navy are sufficient to adapt to such a project, however, the side effects of such an undertaking and its likelihood of success make it questionable.

Artificial Upwelling.

A variant of sea fertilization would involve sending nutrient-rich water from the seafloor to the surface where it would stimulate the growth of plankton and algae. These would absorb Co2 and help control global warming.

Source

Another alternative that is technologically feasible but may create more harm than good.

These are some of the possible methods of geoengineering that humanity could use to address climate change however.

There is no Ideal alternative, the Ideal would be not to have to resort to such alternatives.

Around geoengineering there is a lot of controversy, and with good reason, all of the options mentioned above can have negative side effects, reflective aerosols can damage climate cycles, building massive scale filters to extract Co2 from the air would require aggressive resource extraction that would further damage the environment, ocean fertilization can damage the balance of entire ecosystems, as can artificial upwelling, however.... all these things are already happening, so the choice would not be between the good and the bad, but to choose the lesser evil .... For unfortunately the need to make such a decision is getting closer every day.

The moral dilemma.

The debate also extends into moral territory, for who can make such a decision to intentionally modify the climate...and once such a technology is developed, what would prevent it from being used for war purposes?
Another important point of the moral dilemma is the fact that if geoengineering is accepted worldwide as an option, governments and the public in general could stop supporting measures to prevent global warming under the premise that they can counteract it in the future, this would be catastrophic because no geoengineering method has been successfully tested, nor does it justify having faith in it as a future solution.

Unfortunately, it is most likely that in the future some form of geoengineering will be applied, because even if tomorrow carbon emissions are cut to 0, we would still have to deal with the snowball effect of global temperature increase by more than 1 degree, the melting of the poles and climate instability, cutting emissions does not solve that in the coming years, maybe not even in the next centuries, so future generations may have to deal with it. And decide which method of geoengineering is the most appropriate, so research in that field must continue, perhaps emerging technological advances such as biotechnology, nanotechnology and new forms of energy generation may offer a viable alternative to geoengineering without such worrisome side effects.

Thanks for reading, if you liked the post please support me with your vote. Have a nice evening.

Recommended Bibliographic Reference

[1] SPACE FAKE VOLCANOES THE RADICAL PLANS TO FIX THE CLIMATE "

[2] THE CASE FOR GEOENGINEERING EARTHS CLIMATE FUTURE QA WITH WAKE SMITH

[3] WHAT IS GEOENGINEERING