Humanity faces an increasing number of ecological disasters, and the drive to reduce greenhouse gas emissions is struggling to mesh. It is difficult in a short time to change habits and mechanisms: for this reason science also pursues alternative methods to cool the global temperature.
One of these is known as geoengineering, or deliberate climate manipulation. The controversial science is seen as a potential "backup plan" should humanity fail to reduce carbon emissions by the required 2 degrees.
This plan will now receive a $ 4 million second loan David Fahey, director of the chemical sciences division of the National Oceanic and Atmospher Administration (NOAA) Earth System Research Laboratory.
Two types of geoengineering under study
Fahey reported that the United States government is ready to study two types of geoengineering.
One of these methods is the management of solar radiation, a type of climate geoengineering that involves spraying aerosols into the atmosphere in hopes of reflecting sunlight and cooling the planet. This type of geoengineering is in fact a real climatic manipulation. Extremely controversial, too. Previous studies have linked the technology to potentially dangerous results for various parts of the planet.
The second tactic involves the use of aerosol to create artificial clouds and low over the ocean. "This technique is borrowed from the wake of ships, the long traces left by the passage of ocean merchant ships that are seen by satellites as reflective paths".
Fahey says an upcoming study by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine titled “Climate Intervention Strategies That Reflect Sunlight to Cool the Earth” will promote further studies in both areas. Anyone wishing to create a chemtrail geoengineering association can take a seat, but there are no conspiracies here: it's all out in the open.
Semantics first
Fahey also suggests changing the term geoengineering to a "more neutral word" such as "climate intervention". Fahey called geoengineering a "tangled skein". Yes, there are many positive effects of such interventions, but also widespread concerns. Science Magazine note that several nations have already expressed concerns about the use of aircraft to inject aerosols into the atmosphere. They could permanently alter the climate or damage the ozone layer.
Fahey says a scientific approach must involve identifying a list of unknowns, including unwanted consequences.
Alan Robock, a climate and aerosol expert at Rutgers University, who previously conducted research for the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), said researchers who argue there will be no significant effects do not take into account the reality that geoengineering could have further side effects, such as the warming of some parts of the atmosphere, the change of atmospheric circulation or the ozone layer.
"I disagree that no area will be significantly worse in a solar geoengineering scenario", said Robock. “And worse than what? If we now begin to rapidly reduce our CO2 emissions by shifting our energy to wind and solar, we will be much better off than a future where simply "we adapt " to a disrupted planet, or we bow to geoengineering. "
Interestingly, Robock said he believed that the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) is already using geoengineering techniques as a weapon of war. In 2015, while speaking at the American Association for the Advancement of Science annual meeting in San Jose, California, Robock claimed that he was phoned by two men claiming to be with the CIA, asking whether or not it was possible for hostile governments could use geoengineering, or mass climate manipulation, against the United States.
Unknowns to explore
The public and scientific community should review all available evidence that currently shows that geoengineering could lead to a potential loss of blue skies, lower crop yields, and increases in soil and water temperatures.
According to a recent study published in Nature, geoengineering could lead to lower harvests. This study is not the first to draw attention to the dangers of geoengineering programs. According to a 2013 study published in the Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, if geoengineering programs were started and then suddenly stopped, the planet could see an immediate rise in temperatures, particularly on earth.
Another study published in February 2015 by an international committee of scientists argued that geoengineering techniques are not a viable alternative to reducing greenhouse gas emissions to combat the effects of climate change. The committee's report called for further research and understanding of various geoengineering techniques, including carbon dioxide removal schemes and solar radiation management (SRM), prior to implementation.
Scientists have found that SRM techniques are likely to present “Serious environmental, social and political risks. Known and unknown, including the possibility of being deployed unilaterally ”.
In October 2018, the UN IPCC released a report that essentially called for climate engineering as the "ultimate option" to save humanity from environmental disaster.
