No consensus on geoengineering..

Furthering the debate concerned with the clouded controversy of Bill Gates’ support of geoengineering via private enterprise, here is a little more information pertaining to the international participation and cooperation, (or rather lack of it?) and regarding the dialogues related to geoengineering.

The use and benefits of geoengineering techniques to mitigate “global warming” is highly debatable and there is much speculation as to the success and the long-term effects of such projects. Would we in fact do more harm than good? Would we seriously alter or damage the planet’s delicate Eco-systems that have evolved over thousands of years?

Advocates would say that there is urgent need to mitigate and offset natural global warming, and that the use of geoengineering would give us valuable time to deal with the associated problems of carbon emissions and other issues concerning climate change? I tend to agree that we may need to instigate some use of technology to offset the lack of swift progress with CO2 emissions, so long as this does not deter us from the goals of emission reductions.

We should at least be open minded enough to contemplate the possibilities and need for geoengineering and to debate the issue seriously. And if it is proven that the need to take drastic action is real, then we must at least be ready and prepared now to contemplate any solutions for swift action in the near future. Some of the ideas concerning CDR and SRM here do seem rational, yet are they really feasible?

The paperwork here is lengthy and endless but does it really tell us anything? Well I’m not too sure, I am still digging. Once again it goes without saying that an internationally agreed policy is required to discuss and debate this issue further. It would be foolish to undertake any project without international cooperation.

Carbon Dioxide Removal – CDR (CO2 absorption techniques)
Solar Radiation Management – SRM (Sun-ray Reflective techniques)

 

ASILOMAR INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON CLIMATE INTERVENTION TECHNOLOGIES
March 26, 2010

Excerpts from… Statement from the Conference’s Scientific Organizing Committee

“More than 175 experts from 15 countries with a wide diversity of backgrounds (natural science, engineering, social science, humanities, law) met for five days (March 22-26, 2010) at the Asilomar conference center in Pacific Grove, CA. The participants explored a range of issues that need to be addressed to ensure that research into the risks, impacts and efficacy of climate intervention methods is responsibly and transparently conducted and that potential consequences are thoroughly understood.

The group recognized that given our limited understanding of these methods and the potential for significant impacts on people and ecosystems, further discussions must involve government and civil society. Such discussions should be undertaken with humility and recognition of the threats posed by the rapid increase in atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations.

Participants reaffirmed that the risks posed by climate change require a strong commitment to mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions, adaptation to unavoidable climate change, and development of low-carbon energy sources independent of whether climate intervention methods ultimately prove to be safe and feasible.

We do not yet have sufficient knowledge of the risks associated with using methods for climate intervention and remediation, their intended and unintended impacts, and their efficacy in reducing the rate of climatic change to assess whether they should or should not be implemented. Thus, further research is essential.”

The Climate Response Fund

The Climate Response Fund was founded in 2009 to foster discussion of climate intervention research (sometimes called geoengineering or climate engineering) and to decrease the risk that these techniques might be called on or deployed before they are adequately understood and regulated.

http://www.climateresponsefund.org/

Further links of interest…

Climate scientists convene global geo-engineering summit
Meeting in California in March will discuss possible field trials of schemes that would tackle climate change by reflecting sunlight or fertilising the ocean with iron

Royal Society launches major study on the governance of geoengineering

Published Date: 18 March 2010

“A major new initiative to ensure strict governance of any plans for solar radiation management (SRM) geoengineering (counteracting global warming by reflecting a small percentage of the sun’s light and heat back into space), will be undertaken this year by the Royal Society, in partnership with the TWAS, the academy of sciences for the developing world, and the Environmental Defense Fund (EDF).

The first output of the Initiative will be a set of recommendations for the governance of geoengineering research, to be released late in 2010.

Proposed geoengineering techniques that reflect the sun’s light and heat back into space may offer valuable opportunities to reduce global warming, and could do so quite rapidly, but it is likely that their impacts would also affect rainfall, regional weather patterns and ocean currents.

These impacts would not be restricted by national boundaries, so actions in one country could have highly significant effects in another, for example by changing rainfall and so affecting agriculture and water supply.”

House of Commons (UK) Science and Technology Committee
Fifth Report ~ The Regulation of Geoengineering

“Here you can browse the report together with the Proceedings of the Committee. The published report was ordered by the House of Commons to be printed 10 March 2010.”

…