Researchers show limitations and side effects of large-scale climate intervention

Feb 25, 2014

Despite international agreements on climate protection and political declarations of intent, global greenhouse gas emissions have not decreased. On the contrary, they continue to increase. With a growing world population and significant industrialization in emerging markets such as India and China the emission trend reversal necessary to limit global warming seems to be unlikely.

Therefore, large-scale methods to artificially slow down global warming are increasingly being discussed. They include proposals to fertilize the oceans, so that stimulated plankton can remove carbon dioxide (CO2) from the atmosphere, or to reduce the Sun's incoming radiation with atmospheric aerosols or mirrors in space, so as to reduce . All of these approaches can be classified as "climate engineering". "However, the long-term consequences and side effects of these methods have not been adequately studied," says Dr. David Keller from the GEOMAR Helmholtz Centre for Ocean Research Kiel. Together with colleagues the expert in modelling has compared several Climate Engineering methods using a computer model. The results of the study have now been published in the internationally renowned online journal Nature Communications.

"The problem with previous research was that in most cases the methods were studied with different models using different assumptions and different sets of earth system components, making it difficult to compare the effects and side effects of different methods," Dr. Keller says. He adds: "We wanted to simulate different climate engineering methods using the same basic assumptions and Earth system model". For their study, the researchers chose five well-known climate engineering approaches: The reduction of incoming solar radiation, the afforestation of large desert areas in North Africa and Australia, and three different techniques aimed at increasing ocean carbon uptake. In parallel, the scientists also simulated future changes in the Earth system without climate engineering, based on the high-CO2 emission scenario used by the UN IPCC.

Even under ideal conditions assumed in the simulations, the potential benefits of the various climate engineering methods were limited. Only a continuous reduction of solar radiation could prevent the Earth from warming significantly. The afforestation of the Sahara and the Australian outback, however even caused some additional : "The forests removed carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, but at the same time the earth's surface became darker and could store more heat," Dr. Keller explains of this phenomenon. All of the other techniques showed significant side effects, too. For example, the fertilization of the oceans allowed plankton to remove CO2 from the atmosphere, but also changed the size of ocean oxygen minimum zones.

Another important question for the researchers: What happens if climate engineering is stopped after a few decades for technical or political reasons? "For several methods we saw a rapid change in the simulated climate when climate engineering ended," says Dr. Keller. For example, if after 50 years the sun's rays were no longer partially blocked, the Earth warmed by several degrees within a few decades. "This change would be much faster than the current rate of , with potentially even more catastrophic consequences," says Keller.

The study is the basis for further research in the priority program "Climate Engineering: Risks, Challenges, Opportunities?" of the German Research Foundation (DFG), coordinated by co-author Prof. Dr. Andreas Oschlies from GEOMAR. "In addition to natural science studies, we also want to learn more about the potential social, political, legal and ethical aspects of proposed climate engineering methods. For one thing, this study clearly shows that there would always be many losers in addition to possible winners. Some side effects would even affect future generations. A decision for or against thus would have to be considered carefully and be fully legitimized, and must thus be based on a much better understanding of possible effects, uncertainties and risks than we have today," says Professor Oschlies .

Explore further: Climate engineering—what do the public think?

More information: Nature Communications 5: 3304, DOI: 10.1038/ncomms4304

add to favorites email to friend print save as pdf

Related Stories

Global warming's record-setting pace

Feb 17, 2014

The pace of global warming over the last century has been about twice as rapid over land than over the oceans and will continue to be more dramatic going forward if emissions are not curbed. According to ...

Volcanoes helped offset man-made warming: study

Feb 23, 2014

Volcanoes spewing Sun-reflecting particles into the atmosphere have partly offset the effects of Man's carbon emissions over a 15-year period that has become a global-warming battleground, researchers said Sunday.

Geoengineering could disrupt rainfall patterns

Jun 06, 2012

A geoengineering solution to climate change could lead to significant rainfall reduction in Europe and North America, a team of European scientists concludes. The researchers studied how models of the Earth ...

Is global warming hiding underwater?

Feb 10, 2014

Satellite observations of global sea-surface temperature show that a 30-year upward trend has slowed down within the last 15 years. Climate scientists say this is not the end of global warming, but the result ...

Recommended for you

Rising anger as Nicaragua canal to break ground

11 hours ago

As a conscripted soldier during the Contra War of the 1980s, Esteban Ruiz used to flee from battles because he didn't want to have to kill anyone. But now, as the 47-year-old farmer prepares to fight for ...

Hopes, fears, doubts surround Cuba's oil future

Dec 20, 2014

One of the most prolific oil and gas basins on the planet sits just off Cuba's northwest coast, and the thaw in relations with the United States is giving rise to hopes that Cuba can now get in on the action.

New challenges for ocean acidification research

Dec 19, 2014

Over the past decade, ocean acidification has received growing recognition not only in the scientific area. Decision-makers, stakeholders, and the general public are becoming increasingly aware of "the other carbon dioxide ...

User comments : 2

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

Maggnus
5 / 5 (6) Feb 25, 2014
SO it seems that trying to screw with a system we are already screwing with is a bad idea.

Who da thunk?
Howhot
5 / 5 (3) Mar 03, 2014
Despite international agreements on climate protection and political declarations of intent, global greenhouse gas emissions have not decreased. On the contrary, they continue to increase.

The international agreement is fine, except for one nation; the USA. Without US leadership on this global problem, nothing will happen, and nothing is! This in spite of nearly 100% scientific consensus on the cause-effects, the science and computer modeling of environmental impact of mankind's blunders of over-production of CO2. 90% of all American scientist agree that global temperatures are rising and 82% (a pathetic number, but a majority) believe in AGW, the Anthropogenic Global Warming model of human caused warming from excessive fossil fuel usage.

This is the issue of the day for the world! Day in and day out, we should all think and practice how to stop this man made extinction event from happening.

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.