Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Saturday April 18 2015, @01:11PM   Printer-friendly
from the not-going-to-end-well dept.

Any attempts to engineer the climate are likely to result in "different" climate change, rather than its elimination, new results suggest. Prof Ken Caldeira, of Stanford University, presented research at a major conference on the climate risks and impacts of geoengineering. These techniques have been hailed by some as a quick fix for climate change.

But the impacts of geoengineering on oceans, the water cycle and land environments are hotly debated. They have been discussed at a meeting this week of 12,000 scientists in Vienna. Researchers are familiar with the global cooling effects of volcanic eruptions, seen both historically and even back into the deep past of the rock record. With this in mind, some here at the European Geosciences Union General Assembly ( http://www.egu2015.eu ) have been discussing the possible worldwide consequences of pumping sulphate aerosols into the stratosphere to attempt to reflect sunlight back into space and cool the planet.

http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-32334528

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 5, Interesting) by jcross on Saturday April 18 2015, @03:13PM

    by jcross (4009) on Saturday April 18 2015, @03:13PM (#172426)

    Yes, but I believe we're supposed to be nearing the end of the current interglacial period, which means that things should have been cooling off already. It's possible that we've put off the ice age a bit, which is probably a good thing for us, but that would be a tough balance to hold. I think the climate scientists are well aware of glaciation cycles and have accounted for that as an expected variation in baseline temperatures, which is why they can say that anthropogenic climate change may have started something like 8-9,000 years ago from clearing land for agriculture. I'm no great fan of the cult of Al Gore, but I'm also pretty sure our activities have *some* effect on the climate, even if it's hard to pin down.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +4  
       Interesting=4, Total=4
    Extra 'Interesting' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   5  
  • (Score: 5, Insightful) by Runaway1956 on Saturday April 18 2015, @04:11PM

    by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Saturday April 18 2015, @04:11PM (#172469) Journal

    Good answer.

    I've long been convinced that mankind's most harmful affects on the environment is deforestation. People see the lack of vegetation in a desert as the result of to little moisture. Looking at it from another angle, we can just as easily say that there is little moisture because there is so little vegetation to hold the moisture. Much of the mideast was very fertile, thousands of years ago. Today - much of it is desert. What happened? Well - they cut down the trees, over grazed the pasture lands, and when nothing else could subsist on the drying land, they put goats on the land to finish killing off the vegetation.

    Want to save the earth, as we know it? Plant some trees. World Wide Arbor day! If a tree won't grow where you live, plant some shrubs. If there's not enough moisture for shrubs and bushes, plant some drought resistant grass. Let's turn the world green, with photosynthesis!!

    Good news for those who are worried about carbon dioxide. Planting all that green stuff will sequester BILLIONS of tons of carbon!!