An environmental entrepreneur whose plan to dump iron in a patch of the Pacific Ocean was shelved four years ago after a scientific outcry has gone ahead with a similar experiment without any academic or government oversight, startling and unnerving marine researchers. Read more here!
|
 Image: John McNeill. A conceptualized image of an unmanned, wind-powered, remotely controlled ship that could be used to implement cloud brightening. A group of researchers, including ATMO‘s Rob Wood, have published a comprehensive paper on marine cloud brightening, to shed light on what we do and don’t know about this geoengineering possibility. They argue that we can, and should, gather more information about marine cloud brightening as a way to slow global warming, including performing small-scale experiments. Read more about Rob’s paper here! A new UW modeling study shows that injecting sulfate particles in the stratosphere to increase aerosol levels would not stop the effects of increased greenhouse gases. The study, authored by Atmospheric Sciences’ Kelly McCusker and others, shows that increased aerosol levels cannot balance changes in atmospheric and oceanic circulation brought on by higher levels of atmospheric carbon dioxide. Read more here. A U.S. panel has called for a concerted effort to study proposals to manipulate the climate to slow global warming — a heretical notion among some environmentalists. In an interview with Yale Environment 360, Jane C. S. Long, the group’s chairwoman, explains why we need to know more about the possibilities and perils of geoengineering. With political action on curbing greenhouse gases stalled in Congress, according to the New York Times a panel is recommending that the government begin researching the possibility of directly manipulating the Earth’s climate to lower the temperature. The Bipartisan Policy Center, which created the panel, had a webcast discussion on the idea on Tuesday. Meanwhile, political backlash to the idea of geoengineering is ramping up, at least in the UK (per New Scientist). What do you think: geoengineering, bad, good, necessary? |
 |
|
|
College of the Environment | Log in | Privacy | Terms | Copyright © 2013 University of Washington Powered by WordPress & Atahualpa |
||
Some argue that geoengineering will buy us precious time while we work to reduce carbon emissions. Others state that it would serve merely to reduce some aspects of climate change, without treating the underlying cause. Cloud brightening may be one type of engineering, one that could be tested feasibly. What is this technology, and what might it mean for the planet?
Follow CoEnv