I just wonder how utterly lost someone has to be to propose “artificial trees”??
We have everything we need to turn around climate change now except a planet not run by greedmonkeys.
In 1990 we had less than 2% of world forests left. Clearcutting has accelerated since then.
Why not plant REAL TREES?????
Why not use proper grazing, and hundreds of other simple, natural, direct solutions instead of ridiculous pie in th sky (or chemicals in the sky!) Expensive boondoggles?
Why in short not listen to and learn from Mother Nature instead of trying to find more ways to “conquer and control” Her?
Isn’t it obvious YET that hubris is a fault not an asset?
Geo-engineering ‘could mean more heat’
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Another way to cooling: Removing trees from snowy slopes would increase reflectivity
Image: Thomas Maier via Wikimedia Commons
By Tim Radford
Finding a technology that would let us counteract the effects of climate change is a cherished dream. But if there is a cure, it could be worse than the disease, scientists say.
LONDON, 19 February – The geo-engineers just cannot win, it seems. First, scientists demonstrated that ambitious plans to cool the planet by dimming solar radiation could have unintended and unwelcome consequences. And now they have shown something even more alarming: any programme to block the sunlight could precipitate even more dramatic global warming once it stopped, according to Environmental Research Letters.
Geo-engineering as a fallback strategy has been on the climate science agenda for decades. Almost all climate researchers argue, and have argued for 30 years, that the most effective response to global warming and the threat of climate change is a drastic reduction in the use of fossil fuel, everywhere on the planet.
Although many governments have agreed, and have even introduced attempts to control greenhouse gas emissions, levels of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases keep rising.
So researchers have suggested other possible solutions: “artificial trees” to absorb atmospheric carbon dioxide; the fertilisation of the oceans to accelerate algal photosynthesis; and even the injection of sulphate particles into the stratosphere to block the incoming sunlight. Such things happen naturally, during occasional violent volcanic eruptions, and global cooling has been observed to follow.
This last deliberate technological response might create other kinds of unwelcome climate change, among which would be an alarming change in rainfall patterns, other scientists have argued.
But now Kelly McCusker of the University of Washington in the US and colleagues have proposed yet another reason for limiting discharges into the upper atmosphere. Whatever benefits might follow the technique known as solar radiation management or SRM would be wiped out once the management stopped.
Worse when you stop
Quite simply the technology could ultimately make climate change more dramatic and global warming more alarming. If solar radiation management techniques were applied for a few decades and then halted, global temperature increases would more than double. The consequential heat would be worse than that expected if the sun-block had never been applied at all.
(Read the rest of this article at the link below-