GeoengineeringGeoengineeringand itsand its

ImplicationsImplications

Dave WebbDave WebbThe Praxis CentreThe Praxis Centre

Leeds Metropolitan UniversityLeeds Metropolitan UniversityCrisis Forum: Climate Change and Violence workshop seriesCrisis Forum: Climate Change and Violence workshop series

Workshop 1: Climate Catastrophe, Where are we heading?Workshop 1: Climate Catastrophe, Where are we heading?14 November 200814 November 2008

University of SouthamptonUniversity of Southampton

Content

• IntroductionIntroduction• Geoengineering Geoengineering

proposalsproposals• International Law International Law

Geoengineering Geoengineering questionsquestions

Introduction• Focus of policymakers has been on various forms Focus of policymakers has been on various forms

of preventive regulationof preventive regulation• Climate change regulation requires huge amounts Climate change regulation requires huge amounts

of will and coordinationof will and coordination• Kyoto-style programs are threatened by Kyoto-style programs are threatened by

uncertainty, cost, equity, etc.uncertainty, cost, equity, etc.• Even the most austere post-Kyoto regulatory Even the most austere post-Kyoto regulatory

regime cannot now prevent global temperature riseregime cannot now prevent global temperature rise• Do we then adapt to climate change or look for Do we then adapt to climate change or look for

alternatives?alternatives?

Preventing Climate Change through Regulation

• A Tragedy of the CommonsA Tragedy of the Commons• Effective Climate Change Regulation Effective Climate Change Regulation 

– Difficult to agreeDifficult to agree– Difficult to monitor & enforceDifficult to monitor & enforce– Requires more will than we currently appear Requires more will than we currently appear

to haveto have– Changing imbedded structures is very difficultChanging imbedded structures is very difficult– Adapting to climate change – risky and Adapting to climate change – risky and

avoiding the real problems  avoiding the real problems 

Alleviating Climate Change through Geoengineering

• Remedial SolutionRemedial Solution• Maybe easier to implement than Regulation?Maybe easier to implement than Regulation?

– Fairer?Fairer?– Administratively SimplerAdministratively Simpler– Less Contentious?Less Contentious?– Minimizes Institutional RoleMinimizes Institutional Role

• Avoids the Tragedy of the CommonsAvoids the Tragedy of the Commons• Climate Change Manhattan Project(s) Climate Change Manhattan Project(s) • If successful may accelerate energy use & If successful may accelerate energy use &

productionproduction

Geoengineering Proposals

• Iron FertilisationIron Fertilisation• Sunscreen ProposalSunscreen Proposal• Reflecting SunlightReflecting Sunlight• Doing it with mirrorsDoing it with mirrors• Filtering COFiltering CO22

• Storing COStoring CO22

• Turning COTurning CO22 to stone to stone

Iron Fertilisation• Posed at the end of thePosed at the end of the

1980s,involves dumping1980s,involves dumpingtons of iron into thetons of iron into theAntarctic to stimulateAntarctic to stimulatephytoplankton growthphytoplankton growthand thereby absorb COand thereby absorb CO22– Experiment to enrich a small Experiment to enrich a small

patch of the Pacific patch of the Pacific demonstrated that iron demonstrated that iron fertilization could stimulate the fertilization could stimulate the productivity of ocean plantsproductivity of ocean plants

– Estimates suggest that just one Estimates suggest that just one pound of iron could produce pound of iron could produce enough plankton to sequester enough plankton to sequester 100,000 pounds of CO100,000 pounds of CO22 - even if - even if only 1% efficient half a ton of only 1% efficient half a ton of carbon could be sequestered for carbon could be sequestered for 10 cents10 cents

Problems with Iron Fertilisation

• EfficacyEfficacy– Where does the COWhere does the CO22 go? go?

Could stay in the ocean, or quickly Could stay in the ocean, or quickly leak out into the atmosphere Water leak out into the atmosphere Water returns to natural condition so returns to natural condition so frequent seeding requiredfrequent seeding required

• EfficiencyEfficiency– Even if it works, only offset Even if it works, only offset

~1/3 of global CO~1/3 of global CO22 emissions emissions • Side effectsSide effects

– Growth of phytoplankton on a Growth of phytoplankton on a massive scale will alter the ecology massive scale will alter the ecology with unknown consequenceswith unknown consequences

– Decay of organic matter could Decay of organic matter could remove oxygen from surrface, kill remove oxygen from surrface, kill marine life and even generate marine life and even generate methanemethane

• After 15 years and 11 large-After 15 years and 11 large-scale experiments no scale experiments no conclusion as to whether conclusion as to whether plankton emit more greenhouse plankton emit more greenhouse gases than they absorb, or gases than they absorb, or could cause disruptive nutrient could cause disruptive nutrient shiftsshifts

• However, two San Francisco-However, two San Francisco-based companies, Planktos and based companies, Planktos and Climos, are planning to sell Climos, are planning to sell carbon-offset credits in the form carbon-offset credits in the form of iron scattered in the Pacificof iron scattered in the Pacific

• Iron seeding might fall under the Iron seeding might fall under the Environmental Protection Environmental Protection Agency's 1988 Ocean Dumping Agency's 1988 Ocean Dumping Act – but only applies to boats Act – but only applies to boats registered as USregistered as US

Problems with Iron Fertilisation

“Sunscreen" Proposal• Controlled emission of dust particles to Controlled emission of dust particles to

reflect solar radiation: “Pinatubo effect”reflect solar radiation: “Pinatubo effect”• Creates the human equivalent of one Creates the human equivalent of one

Mount Pinatubo eruption a year - Mount Pinatubo eruption a year - enough to counter COenough to counter CO22 warming warming

• Originally proposed by Soviet Originally proposed by Soviet climatologist M.I. Budykoclimatologist M.I. Budyko

• Wallace Broecker investigated Wallace Broecker investigated injecting massive amounts of SOinjecting massive amounts of SO22 into into the stratosphere from commercial the stratosphere from commercial 747flights747flights

• Could cost ~ $50 billion (in 1984 $) Could cost ~ $50 billion (in 1984 $) and probably damage the ozone layerand probably damage the ozone layer

• Head of Moscow's Institute of Global Head of Moscow's Institute of Global Climate and Ecology suggested to Climate and Ecology suggested to President Putin 2005 that Russia President Putin 2005 that Russia pump enough sulphur into the pump enough sulphur into the atmosphere to produce ~2 degrees atmosphere to produce ~2 degrees coolingcooling

Increasing Cloud Reflectivity

• John Latham and Stephen Salter have John Latham and Stephen Salter have designed a fleet of wind-powered ocean designed a fleet of wind-powered ocean yachts to pump micro-droplets of sea-water yachts to pump micro-droplets of sea-water into clouds & act as condensation nuclei, into clouds & act as condensation nuclei, making them brighter and more reflectivemaking them brighter and more reflective

• Boosting albedo in ~ 3% of low-level marine Boosting albedo in ~ 3% of low-level marine stratocumulus clouds (covering ~ 1/3 stratocumulus clouds (covering ~ 1/3 oceanic surface) could reflect enough oceanic surface) could reflect enough sunlight to curb global warmingsunlight to curb global warming

• Unmanned vessels are powered by 60ft Unmanned vessels are powered by 60ft Flettner rotors - spinning vertical cylinders Flettner rotors - spinning vertical cylinders which also house spraying systemwhich also house spraying system

• Power generated by turbines dragged Power generated by turbines dragged along behind the vesselsalong behind the vessels

• Might require 5-30,000 vessels?Might require 5-30,000 vessels?• Although tiny salt particles are perfect for Although tiny salt particles are perfect for

marine cloud formation, they are too small marine cloud formation, they are too small to create rain clouds & might make it harder to create rain clouds & might make it harder for rain to form – avoid drought areasfor rain to form – avoid drought areas

Filtering CO2 from the Air• Klaus Lackner first presented idea for extracting COKlaus Lackner first presented idea for extracting CO22

from the air in 1999from the air in 1999• Giant filters could trap COGiant filters could trap CO22 drifting past drifting past• COCO22 then stripped from the binding then stripped from the binding

chemical (sodium hydroxide or calcium hydroxide) and chemical (sodium hydroxide or calcium hydroxide) and disposed of while chemical recycled disposed of while chemical recycled

• Global Research Technologies (Tucson)Global Research Technologies (Tucson) claimed a claimed a successful demonstration of the technique in April successful demonstration of the technique in April 20072007

• Wind scrubbers could be conveniently placedWind scrubbers could be conveniently placed• Lackner calculates that a wind scrubber designed to Lackner calculates that a wind scrubber designed to

retain 25 tons of COretain 25 tons of CO22 per year would be about the size per year would be about the size of a large plasma-screen TVof a large plasma-screen TV

• An industrial-sized scrubber would be ~200 ft high and An industrial-sized scrubber would be ~200 ft high and 165ft wide and trap ~90,000 tons a year165ft wide and trap ~90,000 tons a year

• However, it might not be so easy to separate COHowever, it might not be so easy to separate CO22 from from the binding chemical and the process could require too the binding chemical and the process could require too much energymuch energy

• To capture all the COTo capture all the CO22 produced by humans would produced by humans would require wind scrubbers to fill an area the size of require wind scrubbers to fill an area the size of ArizonaArizona

Store CO2 Underground• Carbon Capture and StorageCarbon Capture and Storage• Petroleum engineers pump thousands of tons of Petroleum engineers pump thousands of tons of

pressurized, liquefied COpressurized, liquefied CO22 underground to drive underground to drive oil from the porous rock and also trap the COoil from the porous rock and also trap the CO22 underground.underground.

• Millions of tons of COMillions of tons of CO22 have already been have already been sequestratedsequestrated

• There are a number of other major There are a number of other major sequestration projects under way. sequestration projects under way.

• Saline aquifers, giant pools of saltwater that Saline aquifers, giant pools of saltwater that have been trapped underground for millions of have been trapped underground for millions of years, could hold more COyears, could hold more CO22

• Humans dump about 28 gigatons of COHumans dump about 28 gigatons of CO22 into into atmosphere every yearatmosphere every year

• Some estimates that underground reservoirs Some estimates that underground reservoirs and saline aquifers could store as much as and saline aquifers could store as much as 200,000 gigatons.200,000 gigatons.

• Problems if accidentally “depressurised” while Problems if accidentally “depressurised” while drilling for oil or natural gas or could also slowly drilling for oil or natural gas or could also slowly leak outleak out

Turn CO2 to Stone• Michael McKelvy and Andrew Chizmeshya at the Michael McKelvy and Andrew Chizmeshya at the

Goldwater Materials Science Laboratory at Arizona Goldwater Materials Science Laboratory at Arizona State University use serpentine or olivine, widely State University use serpentine or olivine, widely available and inexpensive minerals, to fuel a chemical available and inexpensive minerals, to fuel a chemical reaction that transforms COreaction that transforms CO22 into magnesium carbonate into magnesium carbonate - limestone. - limestone.

• ““Mineral carbonation” requires COMineral carbonation” requires CO22 to be compressed, to be compressed, heated, and mixed with feedstock and a catalyst, such heated, and mixed with feedstock and a catalyst, such as sodium bicarbonateas sodium bicarbonate

• Scaling up the process to handle millions of tons of CO2 Scaling up the process to handle millions of tons of CO2 would require huge quantities of serpentine or olivine. would require huge quantities of serpentine or olivine.

• Costs ~$70 to eliminate one ton of COCosts ~$70 to eliminate one ton of CO22 - too high - too high• Feedstock and COFeedstock and CO22 must be heated to high must be heated to high

temperatures which requires energytemperatures which requires energy• Rock formations called peridotite, found in Oman and Rock formations called peridotite, found in Oman and

several other places, naturally sequester hundreds of several other places, naturally sequester hundreds of thousands of tons of COthousands of tons of CO22 a year a year

• Researchers calculate that this could be increased to Researchers calculate that this could be increased to billions of tons a year - more than the carbon emissions billions of tons a year - more than the carbon emissions in the US from coal-burning power plants in the US from coal-burning power plants

Deflect Sunlight With Mirrors

• Lowell Wood has proposed using a Lowell Wood has proposed using a mesh of aluminium threads only a mesh of aluminium threads only a millionth of an inch in diameter and a millionth of an inch in diameter and a thousandth of an inch apart to filter thousandth of an inch apart to filter sunlight so that some of the incoming sunlight so that some of the incoming infrared radiation would not reach the infrared radiation would not reach the EarthEarth

• Once in place there would be zero Once in place there would be zero operating cost (unless struck by operating cost (unless struck by asteroid)asteroid)

• From Earth, it would look like a tiny From Earth, it would look like a tiny black spot on the sunblack spot on the sun

• Wood calculates that deflecting 1% of Wood calculates that deflecting 1% of incoming solar radiation would stabilize incoming solar radiation would stabilize the climate, but doing so would require a the climate, but doing so would require a mirror spanning roughly 600,000 square mirror spanning roughly 600,000 square miles-or several smaller onesmiles-or several smaller ones

• Putting something that size in orbit Putting something that size in orbit would be a massive challenge and would be a massive challenge and extremely expensiveextremely expensive

International Law• Convention on the Prohibition of Military or Convention on the Prohibition of Military or

Any Other Hostile Use of Environmental Any Other Hostile Use of Environmental Modification Techniques (ENMOD) Modification Techniques (ENMOD)

• Signed, Geneva May 18, 1977Signed, Geneva May 18, 1977Entered into force, October 5, 1978Entered into force, October 5, 1978Regulations address only military weather Regulations address only military weather controlcontrol

• An international regulatory system An international regulatory system governing geo-engineering is needed or governing geo-engineering is needed or the Earth may be vulnerable to risky the Earth may be vulnerable to risky propositions, despite their good intentions propositions, despite their good intentions

• Climate Change "Marshall Plans," Climate Change "Marshall Plans," designed to curtail greenhouse gas designed to curtail greenhouse gas emissions, tend to fail before they beginemissions, tend to fail before they begin

• Developing technology to affect the Developing technology to affect the climate directly - a “Climate Change climate directly - a “Climate Change Manhattan Project” – may at least give a Manhattan Project” – may at least give a breathing space for regulations to become breathing space for regulations to become effectiveeffective

Reasons why Geoengineering

may be a Good Idea

• ““All of these things might have unintended All of these things might have unintended consequences. …We really don't consequences. …We really don't understand the climate well enough, so we understand the climate well enough, so we don't want to start something where the don't want to start something where the cure might be worse than the disease.”cure might be worse than the disease.”

Robert Watts, Mechanical Engineer,Robert Watts, Mechanical Engineer,Tulane UniversityTulane University

Reasons why Geoengineering

may be a Bad Idea

20 Reasons why Geoengineering

may be a Bad Idea• Effects on regional climateEffects on regional climate• Continued ocean Continued ocean

acidificationacidification• Ozone depletionOzone depletion• Effects on plantsEffects on plants• More acid depositionMore acid deposition• Effects of cirrus cloudsEffects of cirrus clouds• Whitening of the sky (but Whitening of the sky (but

nice sunsets)nice sunsets)• Less sun for solar powerLess sun for solar power• Environmental impacts of Environmental impacts of

implementationimplementation• Rapid warming if Rapid warming if

deployment stops deployment stops

• There’s no going backThere’s no going back• Human errorHuman error• Undermining emissions Undermining emissions

mitigationmitigation• CostCost• Commercial control of Commercial control of

technologytechnology• Military use of the Military use of the

technologytechnology• Conflicts with current Conflicts with current

treatiestreaties• Control of the thermostatControl of the thermostat• Questions of moral authorityQuestions of moral authority• Unexpected consequencesUnexpected consequences

Alan Robock,Bulletin of Atomic Scientists,Vol. 64, No. 2, May/June 2008,pp 14-18Alan Robock,Bulletin of Atomic Scientists,Vol. 64, No. 2, May/June 2008,pp 14-18

Geoengineering Questions• How effective would various climate engineering proposals be at How effective would various climate engineering proposals be at

achieving their climate goals?achieving their climate goals?• What unintended outcomes might result?What unintended outcomes might result?• How might these unintended outcomes affect both human and natural How might these unintended outcomes affect both human and natural

systems?systems?• Should legitimate research activities continue?Should legitimate research activities continue?• Should experimental as well as theoretical research take place? Should experimental as well as theoretical research take place? • Who decides whether an experiment or project can go forward?Who decides whether an experiment or project can go forward?• Are people concerned about geoengineering because they fear that Are people concerned about geoengineering because they fear that

the research might be harmful, or because they're worried that the the research might be harmful, or because they're worried that the knowledge gained might be dangerous?knowledge gained might be dangerous?

• Would it be more cost-effective to continue reducing emissions and find Would it be more cost-effective to continue reducing emissions and find savings in energy efficiency with the best application of technology?savings in energy efficiency with the best application of technology?

• Are science and business mutually exclusive activities?Are science and business mutually exclusive activities?

• Biosphere 2 experiment - the Biospherians tried Biosphere 2 experiment - the Biospherians tried to combat oxygen loss and the rise of COto combat oxygen loss and the rise of CO22 - -demonstrates how difficult it is to manage even a demonstrates how difficult it is to manage even a small mini-worldsmall mini-world

• ““Do we have the capacity intellectually to Do we have the capacity intellectually to understand complex systems at the level of the understand complex systems at the level of the globe well enough to make intelligently thought-globe well enough to make intelligently thought-through conscious perturbations that result in only through conscious perturbations that result in only the consequences that we want, and nothing the consequences that we want, and nothing else?” … “My intuitive answer to that question is: else?” … “My intuitive answer to that question is: No, we don't.”No, we don't.”

Josh Tosteson, Curriculum Coordinator,Josh Tosteson, Curriculum Coordinator,Biosphere 2Biosphere 2

Geoengineering Questions

• "We should not undertake geoengineering "We should not undertake geoengineering except as part of a coherent package that except as part of a coherent package that includes rigorous mitigation and adaptation includes rigorous mitigation and adaptation policies”policies”

• That's because geoengineering remains a That's because geoengineering remains a "moral hazard" because "if you promise a "moral hazard" because "if you promise a solution to the problem of emissions, you solution to the problem of emissions, you encourage people to continue emitting”encourage people to continue emitting”

Dale Jamieson,Dale Jamieson,Environmental Studies & Philosophy ProfessorEnvironmental Studies & Philosophy Professor

Director of Environmental StudiesDirector of Environmental StudiesNew York UniversityNew York University

Geoengineering Questions