Geoengineering can be described as the intentional manipulation of conditions in the earth’s atmosphere to reduce or prevent effects of global warming. Geoengineering is seen as an option aside mitigation of Greenhouse (GHG) emissions traditionally seen as the solution to global warming.
Proposals for geoengineering include having giant mirrors in the upper atmosphere to reflect solar radiation; injecting sulphate aerosols into the atmosphere to drive ‘cooling’, cloud seeding to reflect back more solar energy and removing carbon from the atmosphere to lower or reduce its amount.
These and some more are put forth as solutions to avert projected global warming effects. Geoengineering does not replace efforts to mitigate GHG emissions according to most reviews but may be necessary for remediation in future.
There have been several articles on geoengineering in the past weeks, some of these articles and comments show that people that can be referred to as geoengineering skeptics are gathering. Those writings and comments raise too many questions as if geoengineering is the most delicate decision man will collectively take from the beginning of time.
Proponents of geoengineering procedure understand to a good extent the risk and issues their work may raise and the number of desks decisions will pass before experimentation, so when questions are sometimes raised it makes it appear like those proposing geoengineering solutions focus on the science and not the politics.
Obvious issues include agreements from governments; possibility to hamper moves on emission mitigation and unknown consequence from intentional manipulation of our delicate climate system. These are big problems if we choose to see them that way, but the outlier increased emissions present to our delicate climate system if anthropogenic GHG emissions continue as we have at present are bigger problems.
GHGs trap heat to warm our planet, without them the earth will be too cold to sustain major life forms. GHGs are emitted from some of our activities, some of these GHGs escape to the upper atmosphere to add to existing ones. Simple explanation tells that the new GHGs will join to trap heat, collectively increasing warming to the planet.
With our munificence in emissions and no serious deal for caution, the average temperature of the earth by year 2050 will be up by around 2degrees and we don’t want to see unknown consequences that may come aside those predicted. Climate change is a big issue but is jettisoned by doubts because of its exact and obvious contribution to present weather anomalies obvious from around the world of late.
This in years to come may be clearer but it is not impossible that some weather deviation occurring of recent is for global warming. Cap and trade, carbon tax and war against deforestation are measures put by certain nations and blocs to fight careless emissions.
These, however combat climate change to an extent but more importantly to people, combats investment climate. Economic outlook and finance are issues that are important to people, these issues have been straitened by protracted recession since 2008. A total move for climate change in top polluting nations without a go before move for economic balance may plunge ratings of that government to sharp lows.
Part of accompanying climate change agitations includes technology transfer, carbon credit, afforestation, smarter and smaller devices, investment in alternative energy and a green way of living. These are good moves but are costly in their own respect. Nations that wear most expectation for these are working to get off economic & inflation issues with steps that those above may not fit into.
This shows that even the global warming phenomenon has its own issues which many may prefer that geoengineering is adopted while moves of international agreement for harmonized emission cuts are continuous in annual meetings that are like gamble in the face of obvious non-committance.
Maybe a survey should be carried out about geoengineering for climate change skeptics, some of them will shift their stance because their issue with the whole climate change thing is commitment of funds and effort to global warming that is ‘not’ affecting us for now.
Geoengineering is here and it cannot be dissociated from options we have from climate change, getting started is simple but some persons must front. UK Scientists have taking a position already from their SPICE project and announcement of a certain kind of carbon capture to be available from 2018.
Geoengineering surely involves the world and will take place from a particular place, the test may be carried out in fractions and close observation will follow to see immediate effects or shifts in atmospheric conditions. This may be followed by another, there or somewhere else to see the level of impact that h/have not taken place (both expected and unexpected).
The ozone layer is another consequence that is laid with Geoengineering. Ozone layer depletion is considered as a settled environmental issue because of the Montreal protocol and projection of absolute repair by mid-century. Enforcing ozone standards for industries in adherence to the Montreal Protocol is having concerns of late because is said to be constricting businesses. This may submit ozone layer depletion as a problem again. With regards to the ozone layer, there can be a way out if geoengineering will be used for climate remediation.
Geoengineering to some extent is less of a headache than climate change & global warming put together, some of Africa and parts of Asia are facing unbearable environmental deviations which may likely continue if Global Warming is the cause. We better start looking away from what we believe to be our fears for geoengineering and embrace with hopes of solution procedures that may save life on earth.