Climate engineering explained

Climate engineering (or geoengineering) is an umbrella term for both carbon dioxide removal and solar radiation modification, when applied at a planetary scale.[1] However, these two processes have very different characteristics. For this reason, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change no longer uses this overarching term.[2] Carbon dioxide removal approaches are part of climate change mitigation. Solar radiation modification is reflecting some sunlight (solar radiation) back to space.[3] Some publications place passive radiative cooling into the climate engineering category. This technology increases the Earth's thermal emittance.[4] [5] [6] The media tends to use climate engineering also for other technologies such as glacier stabilization, ocean liming, and iron fertilization of oceans. The latter would modify carbon sequestration processes that take place in oceans.

Some types of climate engineering are highly controversial due to the large uncertainties around effectiveness, side effects and unforeseen consequences.[7] Interventions at large scale run a greater risk of unintended disruptions of natural systems, resulting in a dilemma that such disruptions might be more damaging than the climate damage that they offset. However, the risks of such interventions must be seen in the context of the trajectory of climate change without them.[8] [9]

The Union of Concerned Scientists points to the danger that the use of climate engineering technology will become an excuse not to address the root causes of climate change, slow our emissions reductions and start moving toward a low-carbon economy.

Terminology

Climate engineering (or geoengineering) has been used as an umbrella term for both carbon dioxide removal and solar radiation management, when applied at a planetary scale. However, these two methods have very different geophysical characteristics, which is why the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change no longer uses this term. This decision was communicated in around 2018, see for example the "Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5 °C".[10]

According to climate economist Gernot Wagner the term geoengineering is "largely an artefact and a result of the term's frequent use in popular discourse" and "so vague and all-encompassing as to have lost much meaning".

Specific technologies that fall into the "climate engineering" umbrella term include:

The following methods are not termed climate engineering in the latest IPCC assessment report in 2022 but are included under this umbrella term by other publications on this topic:[22]

Technologies

Passive daytime radiative cooling

Enhancing the thermal emissivity of Earth through passive daytime radiative cooling has been proposed as an alternative or "third approach" to climate engineering[4] [28] that is "less intrusive" and more predictable or reversible than stratospheric aerosol injection.[29]

Ocean geoengineering

Ocean geoengineering involves modifying the ocean to reduce the impacts of rising temperature. One approach is to add material such as lime or iron to the ocean to increase its ability to support marine life and/or sequester . In 2021 the US National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM) requested $2.5 billion funds for research in the following decade, specifically including field tests.[30]

Another idea is to reduce sea level rise by installing underwater "curtains" to protect Antarctic glaciers from warming waters, or by drilling holes in ice to pump out water and heat.[31]

Ocean liming

Enriching seawater with calcium hydroxide (lime) has been reported to lower ocean acidity, which reduces pressure on marine life such as oysters and absorb . The added lime raised the water's pH, capturing in the form of calcium bicarbonate or as carbonate deposited in mollusk shells. Lime is produced in volume for the cement industry. This was assessed in 2022 in an experiment in Apalachicola, Florida in an attempt to halt declining oyster populations. pH levels increased modestly, as was reduced by 70 ppm.

A 2014 experiment added sodium hydroxide (lye) to part of Australia's Great Barrier Reef. It raised pH levels to nearly preindustrial levels.

However, producing alkaline materials typically releases large amounts of, partially offsetting the sequestration. Alkaline additives become diluted and dispersed in one month, without durable effects, such that if necessary, the program could be ended without leaving long-term effects.

Ocean sulfur cycle enhancement

See main article: Ocean fertilization.

Enhancing the natural marine sulfur cycle by fertilizing a small portion with iron—typically considered to be a greenhouse gas remediation method—may also increase the reflection of sunlight.[32] [33] Such fertilization, especially in the Southern Ocean, would enhance dimethyl sulfide production and consequently cloud reflectivity. This could potentially be used as regional SRM, to slow Antarctic ice from melting. Such techniques also tend to sequester carbon, but the enhancement of cloud albedo also appears to be a likely effect.

Submarine forest

Another 2022 experiment attempted to sequester carbon using giant kelp planted off the Namibian coast. Whilst this approach has been called ocean geoengineering by the researchers it is just another form of carbon dioxide removal via sequestration. Another term that is used to describe this process is blue carbon management and also marine geoengineering.

Glacier stabilization

Problems

Interventions at large scale run a greater risk of unintended disruptions of natural systems, resulting in a dilemma that such disruptions might be more damaging than the climate damage that they offset.

Ethical aspects

Climate engineering may reduce the urgency of reducing carbon emissions, a form of moral hazard.[34] Also, most efforts have only temporary effects, which implies rapid rebound if they are not sustained.[35] The Union of Concerned Scientists points to the danger that the use of climate engineering technology will become an excuse not to address the root causes of climate change, slow our emissions reductions and start moving toward a low-carbon economy.[36] However, several public opinion surveys and focus groups reported either a desire to increase emission cuts in the presence of climate engineering, or no effect.[37] [38] [39] Other modelling work suggests that the prospect of climate engineering may in fact increase the likelihood of emissions reduction.[40] [41] [42] [43]

If climate engineering can alter the climate, then this raises questions whether humans have the right to deliberately change the climate, and under what conditions. For example, using climate engineering to stabilize temperatures is not the same as doing so to optimize the climate for some other purpose. Some religious traditions express views on the relationship between humans and their surroundings that encourage (to conduct responsible stewardship) or discourage (to avoid hubris) explicit actions to affect climate.[44]

Society and culture

Public perception

A large 2018 study used an online survey to investigate public perceptions of six climate engineering methods in the United States, United Kingdom, Australia, and New Zealand.[45] Public awareness of climate engineering was low; less than a fifth of respondents reported prior knowledge. Perceptions of the six climate engineering methods proposed (three from the carbon dioxide removal group and three from the solar radiation modification group) were largely negative and frequently associated with attributes like 'risky', 'artificial' and 'unknown effects'. Carbon dioxide removal methods were preferred over solar radiation modification. Public perceptions were remarkably stable with only minor differences between the different countries in the surveys.[46]

Some environmental organizations (such as Friends of the Earth and Greenpeace) have been reluctant to endorse or oppose solar radiation modification, but are often more supportive of nature-based carbon dioxide removal projects, such as afforestation and peatland restoration.[47]

Research and projects

Several organizations have investigated climate engineering with a view to evaluating its potential, including the US Congress,[48] the US National Academy of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine,[49] the Royal Society,[50] the UK Parliament,[51] the Institution of Mechanical Engineers,[52] and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

In 2009, the Royal Society in the UK reviewed a wide range of proposed climate engineering methods and evaluated them in terms of effectiveness, affordability, timeliness, and safety (assigning qualitative estimates in each assessment). The key recommendations reports were that "Parties to the UNFCCC should make increased efforts towards mitigating and adapting to climate change, and in particular to agreeing to global emissions reductions", and that "[nothing] now known about geoengineering options gives any reason to diminish these efforts".[53] Nonetheless, the report also recommended that "research and development of climate engineering options should be undertaken to investigate whether low-risk methods can be made available if it becomes necessary to reduce the rate of warming this century".

In 2009, a review examined the scientific plausibility of proposed methods rather than the practical considerations such as engineering feasibility or economic cost. The authors found that "[air] capture and storage shows the greatest potential, combined with afforestation, reforestation and bio-char production", and noted that "other suggestions that have received considerable media attention, in particular, "ocean pipes" appear to be ineffective".[54] They concluded that "[climate] geoengineering is best considered as a potential complement to the mitigation of emissions, rather than as an alternative to it".

The IMechE report examined a small subset of proposed methods (air capture, urban albedo and algal-based capture techniques), and its main conclusions in 2011 were that climate engineering should be researched and trialed at the small scale alongside a wider decarbonization of the economy.

In 2015, the US National Academy of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine concluded a 21-month project to study the potential impacts, benefits, and costs of climate engineering. The differences between these two classes of climate engineering "led the committee to evaluate the two types of approaches separately in companion reports, a distinction it hopes carries over to future scientific and policy discussions."[55] [56] [57] The resulting study titled Climate Intervention was released in February 2015 and consists of two volumes: Reflecting Sunlight to Cool Earth[58] and Carbon Dioxide Removal and Reliable Sequestration.[59]

In June 2023 the US government released a report that recommended conducting research on stratospheric aerosol injection and marine cloud brightening.[60]

As of 2024 the Coastal Atmospheric Aerosol Research and Engagement (CAARE) project was launching sea salt into the marine sky in an effort to increase cloud "brightness" (reflective capacity). The sea salt is launched from the USS Hornet Sea, Air & Space Museum (based on the project's regulatory filings).[61]

See also

Notes and References

  1. IPCC (2022) Chapter 1: Introduction and Framing in Climate Change 2022: Mitigation of Climate Change. Contribution of Working Group III to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA
  2. IPCC, 2021: Annex VII: Glossary [Matthews, J.B.R., V. Möller, R. van Diemen, J.S. Fuglestvedt, V. Masson-Delmotte, C.  Méndez, S. Semenov, A. Reisinger (eds.)]. In Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Masson-Delmotte, V., P. Zhai, A. Pirani, S.L. Connors, C. Péan, S. Berger, N. Caud, Y. Chen, L. Goldfarb, M.I. Gomis, M. Huang, K. Leitzell, E. Lonnoy, J.B.R. Matthews, T.K. Maycock, T. Waterfield, O. Yelekçi, R. Yu, and B. Zhou (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, pp. 2215–2256, .
  3. Book: National Academies of Sciences, Engineering . Reflecting Sunlight: Recommendations for Solar Geoengineering Research and Research Governance . 2021-03-25 . 978-0-309-67605-2 . en . 10.17226/25762 . 2021-04-17 . https://web.archive.org/web/20210417055338/https://www.nap.edu/catalog/25762/reflecting-sunlight-recommendations-for-solar-geoengineering-research-and-research-governance . 2021-04-17 . live . 234327299.
  4. Zevenhovena . Ron . Fält . Martin . June 2018 . Radiative cooling through the atmospheric window: A third, less intrusive geoengineering approach . Energy . 152 . An alternative, third geoengineering approach would be enhanced cooling by thermal radiation from the Earth's surface into space. . Elsevier Science Direct.
  5. Wang . Tong . Wu . Yi . Shi . Lan . Hu . Xinhua . Chen . Min . Wu . Limin . 2021 . A structural polymer for highly efficient all-day passive radiative cooling . Nature Communications . 12 . 365 . 365 . 10.1038/s41467-020-20646-7 . 7809060 . 33446648 . One possibly alternative approach is passive radiative cooling—a sky-facing surface on the Earth spontaneously cools by radiating heat to the ultracold outer space through the atmosphere’s longwave infrared (LWIR) transparency window (λ ~ 8–13 μm)..
  6. Chen . Meijie . Pang . Dan . Chen . Xingyu . Yan . Hongjie . Yang . Yuan . 2022 . Passive daytime radiative cooling: Fundamentals, material designs, and applications . EcoMat . 4 . 10.1002/eom2.12153 . Passive daytime radiative cooling dissipates terrestrial heat to the extremely cold outer space without using any energy input or producing pollution. It has the potential to simultaneously alleviate the two major problems of energy crisis and global warming. . 240331557. free .
  7. Book: Gernot Wagner . Geoengineering: the Gamble . 2021.
  8. Book: Matthias Honegger . Climate Engineering Avoiding Pandora's Box through Research and Governance. . Axel Michaelowa . Sonja Butzengeiger-Geyer . Fridtjof Nansen Institute (FNI), Perspectives . 2012 . FNI Climate Policy Perspectives . 2018-10-09 . https://web.archive.org/web/20150906055338/https://www.fni.no/doc%26pdf/FNI-Climate-Policy-Perspectives-5.pdf . 2015-09-06 . dead.
  9. Web site: Zahra Hirji . October 6, 2016 . Removing CO2 From the Air Only Hope for Fixing Climate Change, New Study Says; Without 'negative emissions' to help return atmospheric to 350 ppm, future generations could face costs that 'may become too heavy to bear,' paper says. . live . https://web.archive.org/web/20191117214634/https://insideclimatenews.org/news/04102016/climate-change-removing-carbon-dioxide-air-james-hansen-2-degrees-paris-climate-agreement-global-warming . November 17, 2019 . October 7, 2016 . insideclimatenews.org . InsideClimate News.
  10. Book: Global Warming of 1.5°C: IPCC Special Report on impacts of global warming of 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels in context of strengthening response to climate change, sustainable development, and efforts to eradicate poverty . 2022 . Cambridge University Press . 978-1-009-15794-0 . 1 . 10.1017/9781009157940.008.
  11. Dominic Woolf . James E. Amonette . F. Alayne Street-Perrott . Johannes Lehmann . Stephen Joseph . August 2010 . Sustainable biochar to mitigate global climate change . Nature Communications . 1 . 5 . 56 . 2010NatCo...1...56W . 10.1038/ncomms1053 . 2041-1723 . 2964457 . 20975722.
  12. Obersteiner . M. . 2001 . Managing Climate Risk . Science . 294 . 5543 . 786–7 . 10.1126/science.294.5543.786b . 11681318 . 34722068.
  13. Web site: 2018-02-19 . Guest post: How 'enhanced weathering' could slow climate change and boost crop yields . live . https://web.archive.org/web/20210908204350/https://www.carbonbrief.org/guest-post-how-enhanced-weathering-could-slow-climate-change-and-boost-crop-yields . 2021-09-08 . 2021-11-03 . Carbon Brief . en.
  14. Book: Committee on Geoengineering Climate: Technical Evaluation and Discussion of Impacts . Climate Intervention: Reflecting Sunlight to Cool Earth . Board on Atmospheric Sciences and Climate . Ocean Studies Board . Division on Earth and Life Studies . National Research Council . National Academies Press . 2015 . 978-0-309-31482-4 . 2016-10-21 . https://web.archive.org/web/20191214192318/http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=18988 . 2019-12-14 . live.
  15. Book: Oberth, Hermann . 1984 . 1923 . . german . Michaels-Verlag Germany . 87–88.
  16. Book: Oberth, Hermann . ways to spaceflight . 177–506 . archiv.org . NASA . 21 December 2017 . en . 1970 . 1929.
  17. Book: Oberth, Hermann . 1957 . Menschen im Weltraum . german . Econ Duesseldorf Germany . 125–182.
  18. Book: Oberth, Hermann . 1978 . Der Weltraumspiegel . german . Kriterion Bucharest.
  19. Web site: Kaufman . Rachel . August 8, 2012 . Could Space Mirrors Stop Global Warming? . 2019-11-08 . Live Science . en.
  20. Sánchez . Joan-Pau . McInnes . Colin R. . 2015-08-26 . Optimal Sunshade Configurations for Space-Based Geoengineering near the Sun-Earth L1 Point . PLOS ONE . 10 . 8 . e0136648 . 2015PLoSO..1036648S . 10.1371/journal.pone.0136648 . 1932-6203 . 4550401 . 26309047 . free.
  21. Crutzen . P. J. . 2006 . Albedo Enhancement by Stratospheric Sulfur Injections: A Contribution to Resolve a Policy Dilemma? . Climatic Change . 77 . 3–4 . 211–220 . 2006ClCh...77..211C . 10.1007/s10584-006-9101-y . free.
  22. Web site: Chapter 2 : Land–Climate interactions: Special Report on Climate Change and Land . 2023-10-20.
  23. Wang . Zhuosen . Schaaf . Crystal B. . Sun . Qingsong . Kim . JiHyun . Erb . Angela M. . Gao . Feng . Román . Miguel O. . Yang . Yun . Petroy . Shelley . Taylor . Jeffrey R. . Masek . Jeffrey G. . Morisette . Jeffrey T. . Zhang . Xiaoyang . Papuga . Shirley A. . 2017-07-01 . Monitoring land surface albedo and vegetation dynamics using high spatial and temporal resolution synthetic time series from Landsat and the MODIS BRDF/NBAR/albedo product . International Journal of Applied Earth Observation and Geoinformation . en . 59 . 104–117 . 10.1016/j.jag.2017.03.008 . 1569-8432 . 7641169 . 33154713.
  24. Wolovick . Michael J. . Moore . John C. . 20 September 2018 . Stopping the flood: could we use targeted geoengineering to mitigate sea level rise? . The Cryosphere . 12 . 9 . 2955–2967 . en . 10.5194/tc-12-2955-2018 . free .
  25. Wolovick . Michael . Moore . John . Keefer . Bowie . 27 March 2023 . Feasibility of ice sheet conservation using seabed anchored curtains . PNAS Nexus . 2 . 3 . pgad053 . en . 10.1093/pnasnexus/pgad053 . 37007716 . 10062297 .
  26. Wolovick . Michael . Moore . John . Keefer . Bowie . 27 March 2023 . The potential for stabilizing Amundsen Sea glaciers via underwater curtains . PNAS Nexus . 2 . 4 . pgad103 . en . 10.1093/pnasnexus/pgad103 . 37091546 . 10118300 .
  27. Web site: The radical intervention that might save the "doomsday" glacier. 2022-01-14. MIT Technology Review. en.
  28. Wang . Tong . Wu . Yi . Shi . Lan . Hu . Xinhua . Chen . Min . Wu . Limin . 2021 . A structural polymer for highly efficient all-day passive radiative cooling . Nature Communications . 12 . 365 . 365 . 10.1038/s41467-020-20646-7 . 33446648 . 7809060 . One possibly alternative approach is passive radiative cooling—a sky-facing surface on the Earth spontaneously cools by radiating heat to the ultracold outer space through the atmosphere’s longwave infrared (LWIR) transparency window (λ ~ 8–13 μm). .
  29. Munday . Jeremy . 2019 . Tackling Climate Change through Radiative Cooling . Joule . 3 . 9 . 2057–2060 . 10.1016/j.joule.2019.07.010 . A reduction in solar absorption is usually proposed through the injection of reflective aerosols into the atmosphere; however, serious concerns have been raised regarding side effects of these forms of geoengineering and our ability to undo any of the climatic changes we create. . 201590290. free .
  30. Web site: Voosen . Paul . 16 December 2022 . Ocean geoengineering scheme aces its first field test . 2022-12-19 . www.science.org . en.
  31. News: Richter . Hannah . 12 July 2024 . To avoid sea level rise, some researchers want to build barriers around the world’s most vulnerable glaciers . Science magazine.
  32. Wingenter . Oliver W. . Haase . Karl B. . Strutton . Peter . Friederich . Gernot . Meinardi . Simone . Blake . Donald R. . Rowland . F. Sherwood . 8 June 2004 . Changing concentrations of CO, CH4, C5H8, CH3Br, CH3I, and dimethyl sulfide during the Southern Ocean Iron Enrichment Experiments . Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America . en . 101 . 23 . 8537–8541 . 2004PNAS..101.8537W . 10.1073/pnas.0402744101 . 0027-8424 . 423229 . 15173582 . free.
  33. Wingenter . Oliver W. . Elliot . Scott M. . Blake . Donald R. . November 2007 . New Directions: Enhancing the natural sulfur cycle to slow global warming . live . Atmospheric Environment . 41 . 34 . 7373–5 . 2007AtmEn..41.7373W . 10.1016/j.atmosenv.2007.07.021 . 43279436 . https://web.archive.org/web/20200813061020/https://escholarship.org/uc/item/3t2791f1 . 13 August 2020 . 18 September 2020.
  34. News: Adam . David . 1 September 2008 . Extreme and risky action the only way to tackle global warming, say scientists . The Guardian . live . 2009-05-23 . https://web.archive.org/web/20190806230902/https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2008/sep/01/climatechange.scienceofclimatechange2 . 2019-08-06.
  35. Web site: 2009 . Geoengineering . dead . https://web.archive.org/web/20091203132630/http://www.irgc.org/geoengineering . 2009-12-03 . 2009-10-07 . International Risk Governance Council.
  36. Web site: Dec 4, 2020 . What Is Solar Geoengineering? . The Union of Concerned Scientists.
  37. Kahan . Dan M. . Jenkins-Smith . Hank . Tarantola . Tor . Silva . Carol L. . Braman . Donald . 2015-03-01 . Geoengineering and Climate Change Polarization Testing a Two-Channel Model of Science Communication . The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science . 658 . 1 . 192–222 . 10.1177/0002716214559002 . 0002-7162 . 149147565.
  38. Wibeck . Victoria . Hansson . Anders . Anshelm . Jonas . 2015-05-01 . Questioning the technological fix to climate change Lay sense-making of geoengineering in Sweden . Energy Research & Social Science . 7 . 23–30 . 10.1016/j.erss.2015.03.001.
  39. Merk . Christine . Pönitzsch . Gert . Kniebes . Carola . Rehdanz . Katrin . Schmidt . Ulrich . 2015-02-10 . Exploring public perceptions of stratospheric sulfate injection . Climatic Change . 130 . 2 . 299–312 . 2015ClCh..130..299M . 10.1007/s10584-014-1317-7 . 0165-0009 . 154196324.
  40. Reynolds . Jesse . 2015-08-01 . A critical examination of the climate engineering moral hazard and risk compensation concern . The Anthropocene Review . 2 . 2 . 174–191 . 10.1177/2053019614554304 . 2053-0196 . 59407485.
  41. Morrow . David R. . 2014-12-28 . Ethical aspects of the mitigation obstruction argument against climate engineering research . Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences . 372 . 2031 . 20140062 . 2014RSPTA.37240062M . 10.1098/rsta.2014.0062 . 1364-503X . 25404676 . free.
  42. Urpelainen . Johannes . 2012-02-10 . Geoengineering and global warming: a strategic perspective . International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics . 12 . 4 . 375–389 . 10.1007/s10784-012-9167-0 . 1567-9764 . 154422202.
  43. Moreno-Cruz . Juan B. . 2015-08-01 . Mitigation and the geoengineering threat . Resource and Energy Economics . 41 . 248–263 . 10.1016/j.reseneeco.2015.06.001. 1853/44254 . free .
  44. Clingerman . F. . O'Brien . K. . 2014 . Playing God: why religion belongs in the climate engineering debate . . 70 . 3 . 27–37 . 2014BuAtS..70c..27C . 10.1177/0096340214531181 . 143742343.
  45. Carlisle . Daniel P. . Feetham . Pamela M. . Wright . Malcolm J. . Teagle . Damon A. H. . 2020-04-12 . The public remain uninformed and wary of climate engineering . live . Climatic Change . en . 160 . 2 . 303–322 . 2020ClCh..160..303C . 10.1007/s10584-020-02706-5 . 1573-1480 . https://web.archive.org/web/20210614062101/https://eprints.soton.ac.uk/440717/1/Thepublic_remain_uninformed.pdf . 2021-06-14 . 2021-05-18 . 215731777.
  46. Wright . Malcolm J. . Teagle . Damon A. H. . Feetham . Pamela M. . February 2014 . A quantitative evaluation of the public response to climate engineering . live . Nature Climate Change . en . 4 . 2 . 106–110 . 2014NatCC...4..106W . 10.1038/nclimate2087 . 1758-6798 . https://web.archive.org/web/20200728153000/https://www.nature.com/articles/nclimate2087 . 2020-07-28 . 2020-05-22.
  47. News: Parr . Doug . 1 September 2008 . Geo-engineering is no solution to climate change . Guardian Newspaper . London . live . 2009-05-23 . https://web.archive.org/web/20180820234933/https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2008/sep/01/climatechange.scienceofclimatechange1 . 2018-08-20.
  48. Web site: Bullis . Kevin . U.S. Congress Considers Geoengineering . live . https://web.archive.org/web/20130126213315/http://www.technologyreview.com/view/416187/us-congress-considers-geoengineering/ . 26 January 2013 . 26 December 2012 . MIT Technology Review.
  49. Web site: Climate Intervention Reports » Climate Change at the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine . live . https://web.archive.org/web/20160729015758/http://nas-sites.org/americasclimatechoices/other-reports-on-climate-change/2015-2/climate-intervention-reports/ . 2016-07-29 . 2015-11-02 . nas-sites.org.
  50. Stop emitting CO2 or geoengineering could be our only hope . 28 August 2009 . The Royal Society . 14 June 2011 . 24 June 2011 . https://web.archive.org/web/20110624054716/http://royalsociety.org/Stop-emitting-CO2-or-geoengineering-could-be-our-only-hope/ . live.
  51. Web site: March 2009 . Geo-engineering research . 2022-09-11 . Postnote . Parliamentary Office of Science and Technology.
  52. Web site: Geo-engineering Giving us the time to act? . dead . https://web.archive.org/web/20110722191723/http://www.imeche.org/Libraries/Key_Themes/IMechEGeoengineeringReport.sflb.ashx . 2011-07-22 . 2011-03-12 . I Mech E.
  53. Geoengineering the Climate: Science, Governance and Uncertainty . Working group . 2009 . The Royal Society . London . 1 . 978-0-85403-773-5 . RS1636 . 2011-12-01 . https://web.archive.org/web/20140312031514/http://royalsociety.org/uploadedfiles/royal_society_content/policy/publications/2009/8693.pdf . 2014-03-12 . live.
  54. Lenton . T.M. . Vaughan, N.E. . 2009 . The radiative forcing potential of different climate geoengineering options . live . . 9 . 15 . 5539–5561 . 2009ACP.....9.5539L . 10.5194/acp-9-5539-2009 . https://web.archive.org/web/20191214043800/https://www.atmos-chem-phys.net/9/5539/2009/acp-9-5539-2009.html . 2019-12-14 . 2009-09-04 . free.
  55. Climate Intervention Is Not a Replacement for Reducing Carbon Emissions; Proposed Intervention Techniques Not Ready for Wide-Scale Deployment . NEWS from the national academies . Feb 10, 2015 . 2015-11-24 . 2015-11-17 . https://web.archive.org/web/20151117032144/http://www8.nationalacademies.org/onpinews/newsitem.aspx?RecordID=02102015 . live.
  56. Book: National Research Council. Impacts. Committee on Geoengineering Climate: Technical Evaluation Discussion of. Division On Earth And Life Studies. National Research Council (U.S.). Ocean Studies Board. National Research Council (U.S.). Climate. Board on Atmospheric Sciences--> . Climate Intervention: Reflecting Sunlight to Cool Earth . 2017 . The National Academies Press . 978-0-309-31482-4 . 10.17226/18988. Ebook: .
  57. Book: National Research Council . Climate Intervention: Carbon Dioxide Removal and Reliable Sequestration . 2015 . 978-0-309-30529-7 . en . 10.17226/18805 . 2018-08-20 . https://web.archive.org/web/20180821031740/https://www.nap.edu/catalog/18805/climate-intervention-carbon-dioxide-removal-and-reliable-sequestration . 2018-08-21 . live.
  58. Book: National Research Council . Climate Intervention: Reflecting Sunlight to Cool Earth . 2015 . National Academies Press . 978-0-309-31482-4 . en . 2018-08-20 . https://web.archive.org/web/20191214192318/http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=18988 . 2019-12-14 . live.
  59. Book: National Research Council . Climate Intervention: Carbon Dioxide Removal and Reliable Sequestration . 2015 . National Academies Press . 978-0-309-30529-7 . en . 2018-08-20 . https://web.archive.org/web/20180821031740/https://www.nap.edu/catalog/18805/climate-intervention-carbon-dioxide-removal-and-reliable-sequestration . 2018-08-21 . live.
  60. Web site: Hanley . Steve . 2023-07-03 . US & EU Quietly Begin To Discuss Geoengineering . 2023-07-06 . CleanTechnica . en-US.
  61. Web site: Marine Cloud Brightening Program studies clouds, aerosols and pathways to reduce climate risks . 2024-04-08 . College of the Environment . en-US.

This article is licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License. It uses material from the Wikipedia article "Climate engineering".

Except where otherwise indicated, Everything.Explained.Today is © Copyright 2009-2024, A B Cryer, All Rights Reserved. Cookie policy.