Should We Try Solar Radiation Management?

For the serious discussion of weighty matters and worldly issues. No off-topic posts allowed.

Moderators: Azrael, Moderators General, Prelates

morriswalters
Posts: 6747
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:21 am UTC

Re: Should We Try Solar Radiation Management?

Postby morriswalters » Sun Oct 02, 2016 4:00 pm UTC

Ok. I'll drink what you're having. :D

Tyndmyr
Posts: 10119
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: Should We Try Solar Radiation Management?

Postby Tyndmyr » Mon Oct 03, 2016 4:17 pm UTC

D-503 wrote:@Tyndmyr
I acknowledge that additional research does reduce the chance of an unanticipated effect. I think the probabilities of an unexpected disastrous side effect from global warming and SRM are about on par because global warming has more expected effects than SO2 SRM leading to more ways for unexpended things to happen.


Well, we're pretty much all on board that "just keep on with global warming" is a bad plan, and should be curtailed regardless.

Risks that are about the same as something we acknowledge as a huge mistake....that's a point against it, not for it.

lorb
Posts: 404
Joined: Wed Nov 10, 2010 10:34 am UTC
Location: Austria

Re: Should We Try Solar Radiation Management?

Postby lorb » Mon Oct 03, 2016 5:42 pm UTC

D-503 wrote:@EMPT
Governments are already attempting to limit CO2 emissions. SRM programs are not being undertaken, even though they are far cheaper per degree of heating averted.


What? That is totally news to me. Source? From the top of my head I can name about ten ways to decrease/limit CO2 emissions that I believe to be cheaper than SRM.
Please be gracious in judging my english. (I am not a native speaker/writer.)
http://decodedarfur.org/

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 5659
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: Should We Try Solar Radiation Management?

Postby sardia » Wed Oct 05, 2016 5:13 am UTC

Speaking of solar radiation management, how much does it cost to turn rural America back to it's native forests?

User avatar
Zamfir
I built a novelty castle, the irony was lost on some.
Posts: 7246
Joined: Wed Aug 27, 2008 2:43 pm UTC
Location: Nederland

Re: Should We Try Solar Radiation Management?

Postby Zamfir » Wed Oct 05, 2016 8:13 am UTC

About 1 billion acres at around 3000 dollar/acre, plus a premium if you want to buy from people who weren't planning to sell, plus extra acres in between that are not currently part of a farm -> let's say 5 trillion to buy the land.

Then there's 2million farms. Another trillion to compensate for the loss of buildings and businesses? Lots of other people who work in agriculture and will need to relocate to new houses, and people who don't work in agriculture but whose income depended crucially on the farming community around them. Let's say 5 million households who need a new house at 200k per house, for yet another trillion? And you' ll need to build new infrastructure for the relocated people, and capital outlay for the new jobs.

Let's say, in total 10 trillion dollars (order of magnitude) if you want to do it eminent-domain style with ample compensations for at least the financial losses. Could be lot cheaper (to the public purse) if you go the full Soviet and just put the people on the train to some New City in the boonies.

After that initial outlay, you'll need to import food at higher prices, partially due to transportation costs, partially because US agriculture is cheaper than most alternatives, and partially because the loss of the entire US food production will raise world food prices.

US farm production is valued at half a trillion a year. Will take more to replace. Of course, this will be partially offset by the new jobs of the relocated people, and partially it is already taken into account in the capital losses estimated above(since the value of the lost land is based on future production). Still, it seems safe to budget at least several hundreds of billions/year, indefinitely, for the permanent efficiency loss going from domestic production to imports.

D-503
Posts: 71
Joined: Sun Apr 15, 2012 11:35 pm UTC

Re: Should We Try Solar Radiation Management?

Postby D-503 » Wed Oct 05, 2016 11:37 am UTC

lorb wrote:
D-503 wrote:@EMPT
Governments are already attempting to limit CO2 emissions. SRM programs are not being undertaken, even though they are far cheaper per degree of heating averted.


What? That is totally news to me. Source? From the top of my head I can name about ten ways to decrease/limit CO2 emissions that I believe to be cheaper than SRM.


According to the following article 1 kg of SO2 can offset the warming effects of several hundred thousand kilograms of CO2:

The Geoengineering Option: A Last Resort Against Global Warming?
http://fsi.stanford.edu/sites/default/f ... Option.pdf

reval
Posts: 72
Joined: Fri Sep 23, 2016 2:56 pm UTC

Re: Should We Try Solar Radiation Management?

Postby reval » Fri Oct 07, 2016 3:12 pm UTC

D-503 wrote:According to the following article 1 kg of SO2 can offset the warming effects of several hundred thousand kilograms of CO2:

That article is somewhat short on numbers and references. However, it does lead to a presentation that includes some numbers:

http://www.cfr.org/content/thinktank/GM ... ng_REV.pdf

Granger Morgan quotes some sources that quantify the relative cost of cutting 80% of CO2 emissions (up to 5.5% of global GDP/year) versus equivalent albedo modification (somewhere in the range of 0.0002 to 0.2% of global GDP/year). You can see how that would be tempting to leaders facing an either/or decision.

The presentation also includes some horrifying plots of what happens if you pursue albedo modification for a few decades and then stop abruptly. You get a warming rate that can briefly spike to 4 K per decade. Then the rate goes down a bit, but you accumulate a lot of warming very quickly. If the ecological damage is a function of the rate of change even more than the absolute temperature offset, you had better be dead committed to an albedo modification program.

User avatar
TvT Rivals
Posts: 41
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2016 2:27 am UTC
Contact:

Re: Should We Try Solar Radiation Management?

Postby TvT Rivals » Wed Oct 26, 2016 7:21 pm UTC

Also, politicians might still screw this one up.

Tyndmyr
Posts: 10119
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: Should We Try Solar Radiation Management?

Postby Tyndmyr » Wed Oct 26, 2016 7:38 pm UTC

TvT Rivals wrote:Also, politicians might still screw this one up.


Sure.

Planning frequently does not account for this possibility, but it's reasonably unlikely for ANY plan to survive to be implemented in technically optimal ways. Nuclear power was initially promised to be too cheap to meter on a similar basis. That proved to be...optimistic.

User avatar
TvT Rivals
Posts: 41
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2016 2:27 am UTC
Contact:

Re: Should We Try Solar Radiation Management?

Postby TvT Rivals » Wed Oct 26, 2016 7:42 pm UTC

And even when there are clear rules not to be broken, people might break them, as in Chernobyl (see also last page).


Return to “Serious Business”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests