A Better World

Figure 1: Cartoon on climate change

I had intended to add this cartoon the end of my last post but decided against it as I felt it warranted its own post. This cartoon again links in to whether there is a need for Geo-Engineering as well as highlighting the human aspect of resistance to reacting to climate change. At present, action against climate change is happening very slowly – Geo-Engineering is only in the initial research phase – and this got me to question why as a species are we so slow to adopt climate change adaptation or mitigation strategies. Research has found that our brains can’t react to climate change because we are not wired to respond to large, slow moving threats which means that it is particularly difficult to reduce emissions.

This cartoon highlights the confusion surrounding people’s resistance to climate change action as it is clear that the transition to a greener, lower fossil fuel burning economy would actually bring about many personal and health benefits for humans and many other species. Despite this, fracking is on the rise (from 23,000 fracking wells in 2000 to 300,000 in 2015) and fossil fuel consumption is ever increasing. From this, it is clear to see that global energy demand is not decreasing and the end of fossil fuels is not close enough. Because of this, greenhouse gas emissions are unlikely to decrease any time soon and thus carbon levels in the atmosphere are also not going to decline in the near future. In addition, around 30-50% of the Earth’s land has been exploited in some form by human activity and all of this means that human impact on the planet has been so profound that global climate may shift away from natural behaviour for many millennia. It is clear to see from this that the ‘Better World’ pointed out in the cartoon is not going to be achieved through a decrease in fossil fuels in the near future and this emphasises the need for Geo-Engineering to reduce climate change effects until individuals begin to reduce their own consumption and emissions. 

Is there a need for Geo-Engineering?

Have you ever spoken to a friend or colleague who is a sceptic of human induced climate change and been questioned about why you believe climate change exists. You stumble through your arguments with statements like, “the planet is getting warmer” and, “there’s more carbon dioxide in the atmosphere now” and afterwards feeling you’ve failed the human race with your poorly formed case for anthropogenic (human induced) climate change. Proving the validity of climate change is particularly important with reference to Geo-Engineering as, if anthropogenic climate change doesn’t exist, why are we even bothering with Geo-Engineering?

So where to begin? Strangely enough, it’s going to start with the two points mentioned earlier – temperature and carbon dioxide (and other greenhouse gases (GHGs)). I intend to begin with the same graph that I used in my introductory blog post as I feel it so clearly shows evidence for human induced climate change. An article by Crutzen and Stoermer in 2000 placed the start of the Anthropocene at the latter part of the 18^th century which coincides with the introduction of James Watts’ steam engine. This is important because we are now looking to see if there have been dramatic climate shifts since this date. Figure 1 shows carbon dioxide concentrations (top line) and Antarctic temperature (bottom line) for the past 650,000 years using records from Antarctic ice cores. Over the period 650,000 years ago – c.5,000 years ago, carbon dioxide levels never surpassed 300ppm (parts per million) and yet the present day level is 380ppm (technically 400ppm in March of this year). Looking at Greenhouse Gases (GHGs) more carefully in recent history (Figure 2) it is clear to see that there has been a dramatic upward trend in Methane (CH₄) and Carbon Dioxide (CO₂) since around 1800. What a surprise that this coincides with Crutzen and Stoermer’s dating of the start of human impact on climate. In less than 200 years, methane levels have doubled and carbon dioxide levels have increased by a third – this cannot just be natural climatic variation over such a short time scale. A strengthening of the case for temperature variation is also that the ten warmest years since records began have occurred since 2000.

Figure 1: Reconstruction of past atmospheric CO2 concentration (top line) and temperature reconstruction for the Antarctic (bottom line).

Figure 2: Atmospheric carbon dioxide and methane levels between the years 1000 and 2000.

Next, I wish to highlight a key paper by Steffan et al. in 2015 on Earth System Trends. Below are parts of some of the figures in the paper that I thought were particularly useful when looking at human induced climate change. By studying Figure 3, the trend in environmental variables is particularly concerning, especially tropical forest lost and terrestrial biosphere degradation. This used in tandem with Figure 4 that shows economic and societal trends shows the link between the two. The year 1950 is marked on every graph highlighting the sharp (almost exponential in some cases) increase after this date. From this, it is clear to see that human activity as represented by population, Real GDP and Primary Energy use, etc. is having a clear impact on many natural environments including the oceans, tropical rainforests and coastal environments. The similarity in trends post-1950 is too hard to ignore.

Figure 3: Environmental trends (1750 - 2010).

Figure 4: Socio-economic trends (1750 - 2010).

It would be a mistake if I did not directly mention the impact of fossil fuels on anthropogenic climate change in this post. It is already well known that the primary source of carbon dioxide is from fossil fuel burning. The global production of fossil fuel energy has increased rapidly since around 1945 from about 1500 Mtoe of energy to just over 10,000 Mtoe in 2010. In addition to this, presently about 80% of the world’s energy is as a result of fossil fuels usage, suggesting that the adding of carbon dioxide to the atmosphere by humans is unlikely to stop suddenly or any time soon. This points to a likely need for Geo-Engineering alongside a decrease in GHG emissions.

So from this there is a strong case for anthropogenic climate change supported by a number of statistics and these prove a need for Geo-Engineering techniques. This means that if you ever meet any climate change sceptics you’ll know exactly what to say!

Welcome!

Hello and welcome to my blog looking at whether Geo-Engineering is a feasible solution to climate change. I hope this blog will explore some interesting topics within Geo-Engineering to investigate in more depth what methods may be suitable for the human race.

At this stage I have some knowledge on Geo-Engineering (but not extensive) but from what I do know, I am sceptical about it. There always seems to be some downsides to the methods of Geo-Engineering I have heard about already and this is one of the main reasons I have decided to write my blog on this topic. I want to challenge my initial opinions to see if Geo-Engineering is in fact a viable solution (or mitigation) for human induced climate change. Further to this, I chose this topic as I believe something drastic must be done about anthropogenic (human induced) climate change and I want to know whether Geo-Engineering may just be the solution humanity is in need of.

I thought it important in this first blog post to outline why Geo-Engineering may be necessary in the future by looking at climate change and highlighting some of the topics which I wish to cover as this blog goes on. Below in Figure 1 is a graph that shows Carbon Dioxide in parts per million (the top line) and temperature of the Antarctic (°C, the bottom line). As it is possible to observe, CO₂ levels have never been as high as they are now. In fact, they have just recently passed 400ppm in March 2016 which is far greater than any level experienced over the past 650,000 years. It can only be as a result of human activity – mainly the burning of fossil fuels releasing carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. 

Figure 1: Reconstruction of past atmospheric CO2 concentration (top line) and temperature reconstruction for the Antarctic (bottom line).

Geo-Engineering is in its early stages of investigation and I believe it is particularly important to get it right before we as a planet do something we regret. There are a number of different Geo-Engineering techniques that have been mentioned that I will look into in future blog posts. Box 1 below comes from a 2008 paper on potential Geo-Engineering solutions and describes potential methods clearly and succinctly. This goes to show that there are many different possibilities under the concept of Geo-Engineering but may not all be viable or effective. It is clear that all these ideas are only in the research phase – highlighting why I hope this blog will be looking at something relatively new and different.

Box 1: Geo-engineering schemes under discussion.

I hope this blog will be interesting and informative and will attempt to look at a topic that is new and in need of investigation. I plan to look at some of these Geo-Engineering schemes in more detail in future posts as well as some other aspects relating to global environmental change and whether there is a need for Geo-Engineering.