Email(s) which include the link 'https://essopenarchive.org/users/673263/articles/716465-addressing-the-urgent-need-for-direct-climate-cooling-rationale-and-options' | |
Advice to WMO on COP29 Planetary Albedo Discussion (9/2/2024 5:25:47 AM robert@rtulip.net)
Here are my initial thoughts on a proposed approach for WMO, which will convene a seminar addressing albedo measures at COP 29.
The World Meteorological Organisation should advocate to IPCC and COP to recognise albedo loss and carbon increase as equal causes of warming, and to institute action to increase planetary albedo.
The loss of planetary reflectivity this century approaches 2%, with risk of a downward spiral into a darker and hotter world. Reversing this decline in albedo is ONE OF the most essential urgent task to slow climate change.
Once albedo is stabilised, longer term programs to reduce GHG stock and flow can be more fully addressed. In no way can these steps be decoupled, as higher albedo is a precondition and prerequisite for lower GHGs. Without higher albedo, CO2 and CH4 feedback amplification increases, creating catastrophic risk. That applies under any emission scenario. Work on both carbon and albedo needs to proceed concurrently. This final sentence is inconsistent with the paragraph's first word. To avoid confusion we should always stress that both are essential and equally urgent.
Radiative forcing is the key metric of climate change. A return to radiative balance is required for Earth System Stability. An augmented policy focus should add to the goal of net zero emissions, supporting a new goal of net zero heating, where cooling forcings equal warming forcings, delivered primarily through enhanced albedo. But before we get to NZH, we need to have a period of negative EEI to expel excess accumulated energy back to space.
Atmospheric aerosols are the most promising cooling forcing. Other measures include cirrus cloud thinning, snow and ice preservation, ocean methods and mirrors. Space based albedo technology is also possible. The array of proposed cooling measures are explained at Addressing the Urgent Need for Direct Climate Cooling: Rationale and Options
our paper for publication by Oxford Open Climate Change.
WMO should recommend to governments to institute an international albedo governance agenda, aiming to establish a scientific body able to assess and fund albedo measures, possibly modelled on the International Astronomical Union. Safe, acceptable and effective international governance is essential to coordinate the required action to increase albedo.
Marine Cloud Brightening could prove the most acceptable and effective way to introduce the concept of higher albedo as a climate goal, as James Hansen suggested in his Global Warming in the Pipeline paper. The aim should be to develop a program of political and technical implementation of MCB
funding engineering, modelling and advocacy, leading to field tests under scientific and engineering management for safety, monitoring and review, reporting to an international governance body and governments, while engaging with communities, media, academia, business and the public. A feasibility study should be commissioned by bodies such as the UK Advanced Research and Invention Agency (ARIA) and/or other national and international agencies.
Machine learning provides powerful tools to optimise questions such as where, when, what and how to apply cooling technologies in order to achieve best global results that most improve conditions for the whole planet, aiming for no losers. All major public policy interventions always generate some losers and most often who they turn out to be is unknowable at the time the policy is implemented. Systems are required to minimise the impact and cost of errors that can be guaranteed to emerge in some form at some time in some place. Old systems should only be displaced by new and better agreed methods. 'Better' introduces all kinds of difficult value judgements. It's probably wise to use different language. Research into the use of AI for solar geoengineering offers high potential in both technology development and social acceptance as a cooling strategy.
Stratospheric Aerosol Injection is a major essential program. SAI can begin at homeopathic scale, adding sulphur or other reflective aerosols to the high atmosphere and measuring for any effect. Don't start me off on homoeopathy! It is a phenomenonally helpful form of medical intervention that has been marginalised by the dominant paradigm of what constitutes 'the scientific method'. It is a superb illustration of the limitations on progress imposed by powerful and dogmatic learned orthodoxy. Homeopathy works almost entirely through feedbacks because the remedy itself generally has no active ingredients. Climate change is 30% direct forcing and 70% indirect forcing from feedbacks. We should be very comfortable with the idea of using benign interventions that have no direct impact but 100% indirect impact. If we could develop climate interventions that were truly homoeopathic, all our problems would be solved! Sadly, that's not gong to happen. As safety and impacts are measured, governments will be able to decide if the benefits outweigh the risks of increasing aerosol quantity, aiming to cool the planet and prevent collapse of Earth systems.
Removing excess carbon is a trillion tonne mining challenge. About one trillion tonnes of carbon have been added to the air as GHGs. Where does this trillion (10E12) come from? Atmospheric CO2 has increased by ~150ppm which is ~300GtC. If we assume that 50% of emssions have been sequestered in the ocean and on land, that implies total emissions of 600GtC. That is far short of 1,000GtC (one trillion tonnes of C). Removing this vast slug of slag from the atmosphere and oceans should be the end goal to restore the climate to Holocene-equivalent radiative forcings. We don't need to remove it all because a major part of it is removed naturally. The primary contribution to such a large scale carbon goal could be from conversion of ocean biomass using photosynthesis. Only the ocean has the space, the energy and the resources to enable carbon conversion on the scale needed to cut the stock of GHGs. More detail required about what is meant by 'conversion'. The ocean is a delicate ecosystem that is central to sustaining life on Earth. We need to be clear that interventions in the ocean at scale are not going to put that in jeopardy.
Emission reduction only slows the flow of GHGs, without cutting into their stock, and is therefore marginal to the overall need to fix the climate. The stock is being continuously cut by natural processes. The issue here is about timing - are the natural processes reducing the stock fast enough, and if not, what can we do to speed them up. And that begs the question about what is meant by 'fast enough'. GHG stock exceeds annual flow by about one hundred times, so regulating the flow has minimal impact on the stock. Cutting the stock of anthropogenic GHGs is the only thing that will stabilise the climate in the medium term. 'Medium term' again begs the question about timing - how much time have we got? Do natural processes that remove C from the atmosphere need a litte bit of human help?
A triad approach, combining action on albedo and GHG stock and flow, as advocated by the Healthy Planet Action Coalition, can bring albedo into consideration in the IPCC. The World Meteorological Organisation is the best body to present such a proposal to COP 29 in Baku in November. WMO can say that a reassessment of climate policy is required in light of recent extreme weather, indicating the need for higher albedo to mitigate risk. Action on albedo is urgent, and governments should approve research into the most safe, acceptable and effective measures to cool the planet and prevent dangerous warming.
Recognising the intransigence and power of opponents, a lobbying strategy is needed to influence governments to support higher albedo. But as a complement, not as an alternative or priority, to reducing emissions. Broad dissemination of scientific information and commentary can reverse public apprehensions, supporting a well governed and well designed implementation strategy.
Regards
Robert Tulip
HPAC/PRAG/rebrighten.org
--
Climate change impacts on insurance and sea level rise in SE US (9/5/2024 9:19:34 PM Ron Baiman)
Dear Colleagues,
https://podcasts.apple.com/my/podcast/fragile-insurers-risky-mortgages-and-the-climate-crisis/id1469270123?i=1000662539954
https://podcasts.apple.com/gh/podcast/the-complex-threat-of-sea-level-rise-w-pulitzer/id1469270123?i=1000656447378
These topics came up in our breakout discussion at the HPAC GM strategy session today. I promised I would share relevant podcasts!
Best,
Ron
--
Healthy Planet Action Coalition
Addressing the Urgent Need for Direct Climate Cooling: Rationale and Options
An Open Letter to the IMO Supporting Maritime Transport that Cools the Atmosphere While Preserving Air Quality Benefits
--
RFF/Harvard SRM social science research workshop (9/12/2024 8:46:00 AM Tyler Felgenhauer)
Dear Ron,
We regret to inform you that your proposed research presentation, “Addressing the urgent need for direct climate cooling: rationale and options” was not among those chosen for inclusion in the upcoming “2024 SRM Social Science Workshop: Cooperative vs. Non-Cooperative Interventions,” jointly hosted by Resources for the Future and Harvard’s Solar Geoengineering Research Program this fall.
Many high quality proposals were submitted, unfortunately many more than could be fit into the time-constrained workshop agenda. Each submission received a thorough and considered review from the review committee, with lengthy discussions and hard choices over which of the outstanding research presentations to accept. We know that you put a lot of time and work into your proposal, and we appreciate this. Thank you for the opportunity to engage with your application.
Although we are unable to offer you a speaker slot, if you are interested and available, we would be happy to have you or a member of your team attend the workshop. We have space in the room for one in-person attendee from your team—or we can welcome as many virtual attendees as you’d like. To signal your interest in either of those options, please register here:
https://form.jotform.com/242034745368156
.
We wish you success in accomplishing your research goals and look forward to staying in touch.
Sincerely,
Billy Pizer, Resources for the Future
Joe Aldy, Harvard University
Massimo Tavoni, RFF-CMCC European Institute on Economics and the Environment
Tyler Felgenhauer, Duke University
Kristin Hayes, Resources for the Future
Milan Elkerbout, Resources for the Future
--
Healthy Planet Action Coalition
Addressing the Urgent Need for Direct Climate Cooling: Rationale and Options
An Open Letter to the IMO Supporting Maritime Transport that Cools the Atmosphere While Preserving Air Quality Benefits
--
WMO State of the Global Climate 2023 (9/16/2024 12:12:00 PM Barbara Sneath)
Hi Herb and Ron,
If you and anyone else hasn’t already submitted comments and would like to do so then this is your chance. Please find the link to the survey on this website.
Best wishes,
Barbara
State of the Global Climate 2023
https://library.wmo.int/records/item/68835-state-of-the-global-climate-2023
--
Healthy Planet Action Coalition
Addressing the Urgent Need for Direct Climate Cooling: Rationale and Options
An Open Letter to the IMO Supporting Maritime Transport that Cools the Atmosphere While Preserving Air Quality Benefits
--
Healthy Planet Action Coalition
Addressing the Urgent Need for Direct Climate Cooling: Rationale and Options
An Open Letter to the IMO Supporting Maritime Transport that Cools the Atmosphere While Preserving Air Quality Benefits
--
Economic tipping points (9/25/2024 12:33:57 PM Ron Baiman)
Dear Colleagues,
Suzanne just forwarded this to me that I thought might be of interest. (thank you Sz!).
Creating an Economic Model of Climate Tipping Points
In recognition of New York Climate Week, S&P Global Sustainable1 published a special edition of the S&P Global Sustainability Quarterly. This week
the Daily Update will review issues raised in the publication.
In practical terms, a tipping point can be defined as a moment when a range of possible outcomes is radically reduced. For example, a glacier in Greenland has been steadily melting due to higher global temperatures. Up to a point, it is still possible for the glacier to stabilize or even expand. However, once enough melt has occurred, the structure of the glacier will be destabilized and the only possible outcome is collapse along with further melting. This is a tipping point.
They are familiar to climate scientists, who study the possible catastrophic tipping points of ecosystem collapse in rainforests or permafrost melting in the Arctic. Once these tipping points are reached, the possible outcomes become limited and detrimental.
From an economic standpoint, it should be possible to create a mathematical model of tipping points and their impact on economic performance. S&P Global Ratings Global Chief Economist Paul Gruenwald discussed such a model in “ Tipping Points Shrink The Sustainable Growth Playing Field” and has been studying the intersection of climate and the economy on various fronts in
Could Green Growth Be An Oxymoron?
To create an economic model of tipping points, Gruenwald distinguishes between weak and strong sustainability. In weak sustainability, natural capital, such as the environment and ecosystems, and physical capital, such as equipment, infrastructure and buildings, can be substituted for each other. This means that the destruction of an ecosystem can be compensated for by building a successful factory that employs many people. In strong sustainability, natural capital has unique benefits. Its destruction cannot be compensated for by gains in physical capital.
Another way of thinking of a tipping point is a moment in which the destruction of natural capital limits any possible offsetting gains of physical capital. Up to a point, natural capital has a regenerative function. However, it can be pushed beyond its regenerative potential. This can happen through a one-time shock such as a volcanic eruption, or slowly over a century of fossil-fuel-based industrialization.
“The introduction of tipping points shrinks the macroenvironmental playing field,” Gruenwald wrote. “Capital cannot be accumulated without bound, and output cannot expand without bound, as in earlier versions of growth models. Those models were incomplete in the sense that they lacked any consideration of natural capital.”
Today is Monday, September 23, 2024, and here is today’s essential intelligence.
- Written by Nathan Hunt.
It is of course to insert a "collapse function" into any model (Keen has experimented with this quite bit for both financial and environmental collapse) and I think it's good that mainstream (aka Neoclassical) economists have finally become aware the the old Nordhaus and followers DICE model is woefully off (as Keen long ago pointed out).
Here's another indication of this: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/groundbreaking-economic-study-suggests-greater-climate/id1469270123?i=1000655639817&l=vi
.
=vi
They are (quite) late to the party and still a small minority of so-called "climate economists"), but better late than never!
Best,
Ron
--
Healthy Planet Action Coalition
Addressing the Urgent Need for Direct Climate Cooling: Rationale and Options
An Open Letter to the IMO Supporting Maritime Transport that Cools the Atmosphere While Preserving Air Quality Benefits
--
Anti-Geoengineering bill passed in the state of Tennessee, USA (9/27/2024 11:46:50 AM Ron Baiman)
Dear Colleagues,
Conspiracy Theorists and Vaccine Skeptics Have a New Target: Geoengineering: https://www.nytimes.com/2024/09/26/climate/geoengineering-conspiracy-theorists-skeptics.html?unlocked_article_code=1.N04.EL__.Y4a-SQnM_fYu&smid=url-share
This Bill that has reportedly just passed in Tennessee does not inspire hope for our species! Anti-Geoengineering sentiment has now apparently been linked up in come quarters with anti-vax, the "deep state" government conspiracy and chem-trails as I recall Brian and Manna Jo saying - but never thought it would get this far.
The article also notes that while the Environmental Defence Fund has come around to at least supporting geoengineering research, Friends of the Earth have not, as I recall confirming earlier intel that we have received. An FOE spokesperson is quoted in the article as saying that "it was unsettling to agree with groups that 'reflect a detachment from the truth'", which suggests that perhaps the FOE position could be changed by appealing to "the true" climate emergency that we are facing.
Best,
Ron
PS - It just so happens that I will probably be moving to Tennessee next year. I'm trying to strengthen my resolve to combat this by keeping in mind John Nissen, Andrew Lockley and many others of you as examples!
--
Healthy Planet Action Coalition
Addressing the Urgent Need for Direct Climate Cooling: Rationale and Options
An Open Letter to the IMO Supporting Maritime Transport that Cools the Atmosphere While Preserving Air Quality Benefits
--
Solar geoengineering could start soon if it starts small Keith and Smith 2024 (10/1/2024 3:29:23 PM Ron Baiman)
Dear Colleagues,
Came across this reference this reference:
https://www.technologyreview.com/2024/02/05/1087587/solar-geoengineering-could-start-soon-if-it-starts-small/
on the second page Smith's 2024 paper outlining a two decade development plan for polar SAI: https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/2515-7620/ad4f5c
to a 2024 article that Keith and Smith wrote that appears to fully support the polar SAI proposal floated in the "Challenges and Opportunities" section of the: HPAC UNDCC paper: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Yly53ZRikqrwvDNzu9KNelbNeNQW7sKB/edit?usp=sharing&ouid=116465941111195452408&rtpof=true&sd=true
Note in particular at the end of the article:
"
The deployers could decide that a subscale project might make bigger interventions possible. While scientists may be comfortable drawing inferences about solar geoengineering from tiny experiments and models, politicians and the public may be very cautious about atmospheric interventions that can alter the climate system and affect all the creatures that dwell within it. A subscale deployment that encountered no major surprises could go a long way toward reducing extreme concerns about full-scale deployment.
The deployers could also claim some limited benefit from the subscale deployment itself. While the effects would be too small to be readily evident on the ground, the methods used to attribute extreme weather events to climate change could substantiate claims of small reductions in the severity of such events.
They might also argue that the deployment is simply restoring atmospheric protection that was recently lost. The reduction in sulfur emissions from ships is now saving lives by creating cleaner air, but it is also accelerating warming by thinning the reflective veil that such pollution created. The subscale scenario we sketched out would restore almost half of that sunshade protection
without the countervailing air pollution.
The deployers might also convince themselves that their action was consistent with international law because they could perform deployment entirely within their domestic airspace and because the effects, while global, would not produce “significant transboundary harm,” the relevant threshold under customary international law.
The governance implications of such a subscale deployment would depend on the political circumstances. If it were done by a major power without meaningful attempts at multilateral engagement, one would expect dramatic backlash. On the other hand, were deployment undertaken by a coalition that included highly climate-vulnerable states and that invited other states to join the coalition and develop a shared governance architecture, many states might be publicly critical but privately pleased that geoengineering reduced climate risks.
SAI is sometimes described as an imaginary sociotechnical scenario residing in a distant sci-fi future. But it is technically feasible to start subscale deployments of the kind we describe here in five years. A state or coalition of states that wished to meaningfully test both the science and politics of deployment may consider such subscale or demonstration deployments as climate risks become more salient.
"
This is all phrased in third person hypothetical as they carefully stress that they have not transgressed the accepted "Overton Window" and themselves strayed into advocating DCC deployment (as HPAC has) in the final paragraph of the essay:
"We are not advocating for such action—in fact, we reiterate our support for a moratorium against deployment until the science is critically assessed and some governance architecture is widely agreed upon. Yet a sound understanding of the interlinked technology and politics of SAI is hampered by the perception that it must start with a significant effort that would substantially slow or even reverse warming. The example we’ve outlined here illustrates that the infrastructural barriers to deployment are more easily overcome than is commonly assumed. Policymakers must take this into account—and soon—as they consider how to develop solar geoengineering in the public interest and what guardrails should be put in place."
All in all I think a very helpful to the HPAC DCC mission and also very revealing of the state of current DCC politics among some of our closest allies!
Best,
Ron
--
Healthy Planet Action Coalition
Addressing the Urgent Need for Direct Climate Cooling: Rationale and Options
An Open Letter to the IMO Supporting Maritime Transport that Cools the Atmosphere While Preserving Air Quality Benefits
--
|