Global warming tactic cools climate but won’t help corals, say researchers

July 3, 2009 by Christine Blackman

( -- “Geoengineering” experiments proposed to reduce global warming by blocking sunlight with atmosphere-injected particles may cool the world but still leave carbon dioxide levels dangerously high, Stanford scientists say.

Sunlight-blocking particles would fail to solve the problems of acidification and dying corals, two significant repercussions of climate change, according to a study by Ken Caldeira of Stanford University and the Carnegie Institution, Damon Matthews of Concordia University, and Long Cao of the Carnegie Institution. Atmospheric dissolves in ocean water, making it more acidic and difficult for animals to build their shells or skeletons, especially corals.

Proponents of geoengineering have called for injecting small, reflective particles into the atmosphere to partially block sunlight and cool the earth, just as ash from an does. The resulting carbon-dioxide-rich climate would cause land plants to grow more vigorously, hold onto more carbon and release less to the ocean. But the difference would not be enough to fundamentally alter the plight of coral reefs, Caldeira said.

The researchers used computer models of the Earth’s climate system and biosphere to simulate the effect of sunlight-reflecting particles on climate and . Such geoengineering methods “might be able to address some of the climate effects of carbon dioxide but they don’t fundamentally address the chemical effects posed by carbon dioxide,” Caldeira said.

“Instead of taking till 2050 until there’s no place left in the ocean where corals can survive, it might be 2053. The carbon cycle effects of the geoengineering might delay that outcome in the ocean by a few years but wouldn’t prevent those outcomes from occurring,” he said. The scientists’ work was published in Geophysical Research Letters.

Despite the limitations, Caldeira and many other scientists support geoengineering research. David Victor, director of the Program on Energy and Sustainable Development at Stanford, presents a case for studying and testing such tactics as emergency measures.

“Geoengineering could provide a useful defense for the planet—an emergency shield that could be deployed if surprisingly nasty climatic shifts put vital ecosystems and billions of people at risk,” Victor wrote in Foreign Affairs with colleagues from Carnegie Mellon University and the University of Maryland.

The paper, entitled The Geoengineering Option, presents methods for increasing the earth’s reflectivity, such as injecting particles in the atmosphere, as “the most promising method for rapidly cooling the planet.” The authors contend that injecting reflective materials into the atmosphere would be easy and cost-effective and could crudely offset warming.

Although these methods potentially interfere with weather patterns and fail to reduce carbon dioxide concentrations and , Victor and colleagues call for a broad and solid foundation of geoengineering research. “The scientific academies in the leading industrialized and emerging countries—which often control the purse strings for major research grants—must orchestrate a serious and transparent international research effort funded by their governments,” Victor and his colleagues wrote in the paper.

More information:

Provided by Stanford University (news : web)

Explore further: Global sunscreen won't save corals

Related Stories

Global sunscreen won't save corals

June 16, 2009

Emergency plans to counteract global warming by artificially shading the Earth from incoming sunlight might lower the planet's temperature a few degrees, but such "geoengineering" solutions would do little to stop the acidification ...

Geoengineering: a quick fix with big risks

June 5, 2007

Radical steps to engineer Earth’s climate by blocking sunlight could drastically cool the planet, but could just as easily worsen the situation if these projects fail or are suddenly halted, according to a new computer ...

Stabilizing climate requires near-zero carbon emissions

February 15, 2008

Now that scientists have reached a consensus that carbon dioxide emissions from human activities are the major cause of global warming, the next question is: How can we stop it" Can we just cut back on carbon, or do we need ...

World needs climate emergency backup plan, says expert

November 7, 2008

In submitted testimony to the British Parliament, climate scientist Ken Caldeira of the Carnegie Institution said that while steep cuts in carbon emissions are essential to stabilizing global climate, there also needs to ...

Coral Reefs Unlikely to Survive in Acid Oceans

December 13, 2007

Carbon emissions from human activities are not just heating up the globe, they are changing the ocean’s chemistry. This could soon be fatal to coral reefs, which are havens for marine biodiversity and underpin the economies ...

Recommended for you

Diamonds show Earth still capable of 'superhot' surprises

September 22, 2017

Diamonds may be 'forever,' but some may have formed more recently than geologists thought. A study of 26 diamonds, formed under extreme melting conditions in the Earth's mantle, found two populations, one of which has geologically ...


Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

3.7 / 5 (3) Jul 03, 2009

Please, please . . . leave my planet Earth's climate alone!

With kind regards,
Oliver K. Manuel
Emeritus Professor, Nuclear & Space Studies
Former NASA PI for Apollo Lunar Samples
Author of: "Earth's heat source - the Sun"
Energy & Environment 20 (2009) 131-144
3.7 / 5 (3) Jul 03, 2009
One more case of DPS(Dieing Planet Syndrome)
3.7 / 5 (6) Jul 03, 2009
Oh please! Corals grew and lived just fine when the levels of CO2 in the atmosphere were well over 5000 ppm! This article is a load of crap. The killer of corals is our chemical pollution running off into the oceans, not CO2.

Besides, Corals get their coloration from bacteria and algae forming a symbiotic relationship with them. Were it not for the chemical pollution in water runoff these bacteria and algae would be loving the increases in CO2, which would in turn benefit the corals by increasing available O2 to the coral animals.
3.7 / 5 (6) Jul 04, 2009
Would all people who believe CO2 emission is pollution please hold your breath. ...put your respiration where you mouth is! :-)
3.4 / 5 (5) Jul 04, 2009
Corals are more than on the mend - they're in full bloom. As in recovered. As in check my sources, because I already did. Guess i can kiss this site goodbye. Mainstream shill.
5 / 5 (4) Jul 04, 2009
Corals are more than on the mend - they're in full bloom. As in recovered. As in check my sources, because I already did. Guess i can kiss this site goodbye. Mainstream shill.
Link those sources for the rest of us when you get a chance.

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.