tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8304928500646903522.post6607396319805597639..comments2024-03-18T15:45:32.866-04:00Comments on bensozia: Geoengineering to Fight Climate ChangeJohnhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01037215533094998996noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8304928500646903522.post-63426754144097201472017-04-21T08:53:59.849-04:002017-04-21T08:53:59.849-04:00As for the matter of "where we set the thermo...As for the matter of "where we set the thermostat"...<br /><br />https://xkcd.com/1732/<br /><br />This is a pretty good visual representation of the global temperature averages over the course of known history. For the majority of civilization's existence, we've had a pretty stable average, which that image pretty clearly displays. We just need to pick a reasonable point somewhere along that central line.<br /><br />It'd probably be best to err on the side of caution, and make any changes be smaller rather than larger. We know from events like The Little Ice Age that even small changes in temperature can have drastic and far reaching effects, so we don't want to cool things too much.<br /><br />It'd probably be best to simply rewind the clock no further than a century, or even less than that, and to stabilize things there. From there, we can monitor the situation and make further adjustments as needed down the line.G. Verlorennoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8304928500646903522.post-64103377063416646752017-04-21T08:43:52.196-04:002017-04-21T08:43:52.196-04:00Typo correction: 0.04% of the annual global produc...Typo correction: <i><b>0.04%</b></i> of the annual global productionG. Verlorennoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8304928500646903522.post-31071106426053781702017-04-21T08:42:08.946-04:002017-04-21T08:42:08.946-04:00Well the supply side seems plausible.
The annual ...Well the supply side seems plausible.<br /><br />The annual global production of sulphur in all forms is about 94,000,000 tons. Of that amount, only about 57,000,000 tons is in a raw form. Using up 25,000 tons of sulfur would only constitute 0.0004% of the annual global production.<br /><br />So assuming we can actually manage to deliver it properly, and keep it in the atmosphere, and that it actually deflects sunlight to the extent we predict, then it certainly sounds mechanically feasible.<br /><br />The question is, what would be the unintended side effects? What would dumping 25,000 tons of sulphur into the atmosphere do to the environment? If it has the cooling effect we seek, it will absolutely alter air currents and weather patterns simply through that mechanism, possibly in unpredictable ways.<br /><br />But what about secondary effects? Could all that sulphur in the atmopshere affect things like cloud formation? How would precipitation be affected? That sulphur will eventually settle out of the atmosphere - what effects might it have on living organisms? Wildlife? People? Agriculture?<br /><br />What if distribution is lopsided, and some areas are super saturated with sulphur in the air, while others receive nearly none? What if this produces lopsided cooling effects, causing weather patterns to become more extreme and destructive? If this sulphur plan demonstrably causes a "natural" disaster, who do we hold legally responsible for damages? How does insurance handle what is normally an "act of god", when suddenly it becomes an act of humanity, or of a particular government, or of a coalition of governments?<br /><br />There are so many variables that need to be factored in to a plan like this, and so much of it is non-obvious or completely unknown.G. Verlorennoreply@blogger.com