An introduction to geoengineering its benefits and negative effects to our environment
The least costly proposals are budgeted at tens of billions of US dollars annually, or around 0. Department of Energy. Shouldn't we just change our lifestyle and consumption patterns to fight climate change, making climate engineering a last resort? Furthermore, ethical arguments often confront larger considerations of worldview, including individual and social religious commitments. Carbon dioxide removal techniques are typically slow to act, expensive, and entail risks that are relatively familiar, such as the risk of carbon dioxide leakage from underground storage formations. The UK Royal Society report outlines the need to build governance structures if research into a wide range of geoengineering methods is to take place Shepherd et al. Conservation of resources and reduction of greenhouse emissions, used in conjunction with climate engineering, are therefore considered a viable option by some commentators. Based on prior inter-comparisons of the different CDR and SRM methods Boyd ; Lenton and Vaughan , it is possible to put forward preliminary criteria that could be used to rank which method will be least detrimental to ecosystems.
This is important because ecosystems, including those within forests, oceans, grasslands, and wetlands, provide both innate value and our life support systems, including numerous essential goods and services MEA They include: Land use management to protect or enhance terrestrial carbon sinks; Using biomass for carbon sequestration as well as or instead of a carbon neutral energy source; Accelerating natural geological processes that remove CO2 from the atmosphere e.
Abstract Geoengineering methods are intended to reduce climate change, which is already having demonstrable effects on ecosystem structure and functioning in some regions. Geoengineering methods have several important characteristics from the standpoint of understanding their ecological consequences as well as their potential physical effects on the Earth system.
Health effects of geoengineering
Introduction As climate change impacts become more apparent and global negotiations to reduce greenhouse gas emissions are prolonged, have we adequately considered actions that complement carbon emission reductions, such as climate engineering or geoengineering? Once broadly deployed, they would take a few months to have an effect on climate, and therefore some people argue they might be useful if a rapid response is needed, for example to avoid reaching a climate threshold Shepherd et al. There is no evidence to substantiate these unorthodox claims. Before they are ready to be used, most techniques would require technical development processes that are not yet in place. In this report, we follow the Royal Society Shepherd et al. They include: Land use management to protect or enhance terrestrial carbon sinks; Using biomass for carbon sequestration as well as or instead of a carbon neutral energy source; Accelerating natural geological processes that remove CO2 from the atmosphere e. The governance issues characterizing carbon dioxide removal compared to solar radiation management tend to be distinct. Depending on the objective of the geoengineering, they might need to operate on very large spatial scales and might require long-term commitments. This is known as the greenhouse effect. This concern causes many environmental groups and campaigners to be reluctant to advocate or discuss climate engineering for fear of reducing the imperative to cut greenhouse gas emissions. Your analyses and comments will be collated and a first summary of the discussions will be made available by 16 February Carbon dioxide removal techniques are typically slow to act, expensive, and entail risks that are relatively familiar, such as the risk of carbon dioxide leakage from underground storage formations. A document of main messages that arise from these discussions will provide input to the 16th meeting of the Scientific Body on Scientific, Technical and Technological Advice SBSTTA under the agenda item on biodiversity and climate change.
Who was to bear the substantial costs of some climate engineering techniques may be hard to agree. Scientists at the Oxford Martin School at Oxford University have proposed a set of voluntary principles, which may guide climate engineering research.
In this report, we follow the Royal Society Shepherd et al. In addition, some initial estimates suggest they would likely be relatively cheap i. Carbon dioxide removal strategies address a key driver of climate change, but research is needed to fully assess if any of these technologies could be appropriate for large-scale deployment.
Inthe UN Convention on Biological Diversity issued two statements on climate engineering techniques.
For example, the purposeful enhancement of net primary production by ocean fertilization can potentially add more carbon to the base of food webs de Baar et al. What benefits?
In general, carbon dioxide removal methods are more expensive than the solar radiation management ones. Various criticisms have been made of climate engineering,  particularly solar radiation management SRM methods.
based on 62 review