A volcanic idea to reverse climate change

August 22, 2011, National Science Foundation
The eruption of Mount St. Helens in 1980. Credit: Austin Post, USGS

Scientists believe that our warming world may face catastrophic changes to its natural environment, including droughts, rising oceans and fiercer, more frequent hurricanes.

Theoretically, it may be necessary to act globally to mitigate the damage. Initially, those efforts will probably take the form of limits on or forest preservation. But some scientists and policy makers believe it might be necessary for scientists to take an active hand in engineering a solution to our climate problems.

Those potential solutions, collectively called "geoengineering," would use scientists' knowledge of the Earth's cycles to curb the rise in temperature, the melting of the ice caps and increasing weather volatility. Yet, very few studies have tackled the practical implications of such extreme measures, in part because of the controversy surrounding the prospect of "messing with" the environment.

"It's ground zero right now for understanding the climate response to geoengineering," said Cecilia Bitz, of the University of Washington. Bitz is one of a handful of researchers in the U.S. exploring the impact of geoengineering ideas. "There have only been a couple dozen papers in the literature, and you'll be surprised to know that it's a rarity to have an ocean GCM [general ] in the model."

A volcanic idea

Bitz, working with University of Washington researchers Kelly McCusker and David Battisti, analyzed the impact of the leading geoengineering solution, the release of volcanic aerosols into the .

"The equivalent of Mount Pinatubo going off every year," Bitz said, referring to the eruption in the Philippines in 1991, the largest in recent memory.

Time series of globally-averaged surface temperatures for various simulations. The green line shows that as a sulfate layer is ramped along with carbon dioxide, global mean temperature can be held close to 1990 values. Additionally, the orange line illustrates the rapid rise in temperature that occurs if geoengineering with a sulfate layer is terminated, but carbon dioxide levels are still high. Credit: Courtesy of Cecilia Bitz, University of Washington

Using the NSF-supported Ranger supercomputer at the Texas Advanced Computing Center, the researchers' simulations explored a range of aerosol implementations, from steady to slowly increasing releases of the aerosols to a sudden cessation of activity, which could lead to dangerously rapid warming.

Regional implications

Though it may be possible to reduce the atmospheric temperature, they found that other aspects of climate change, specifically the melting of the ice caps, may be much more difficult to reverse.

"There are regional issues--there's still warming in the poles and subsurface ocean warming near ice sheets, and there are plenty of unknowns that we can't answer," McCusker said.

Theirs is one of a handful of computational geoengineering studies, and it helps to determine how a drastic human-induced change might interrupt the Earth's environmental systems. The work follows up on other atmospheric studies by Bitz, including a recent publication in Nature that suggests that greenhouse gas mitigation can reduce sea ice loss and increase polar bear survival.

The only planet we have

"We don't know what society would consider an unacceptable level of climate change, but it may happen, and at that point, there may be a demand to geoengineer," Bitz said.

In color is the annually averaged surface temperature over the planet, overlain with the change in winds at 850 millibars due to increased carbon dioxide and a stratospheric sulfate layer. The magnitude of these atmospheric circulation changes, especially over the Southern Ocean, is similar to that induced by just an increase in carbon dioxide. Credit: Courtesy of Cecilia Bitz, University of Washington

A big challenge to studying geoengineering is the lack of a suitable physical environment for experimentation.

"We only have one planet," said Alan Robock, a leading geoengineering researcher at Rutgers University. "Meteorologists and climate scientists do not have laboratories with test tubes or accelerators. And we cannot 'mess with' the only planet we have to test its responses to making stratospheric clouds or brighter oceanic clouds, so we use models of the climate system--computer simulations of how the climate would respond to these forcings."

Bitz hopes the solutions that she's exploring will never need to be tested. But, like an evacuation plan or a bomb shelter, it is comforting to know that if solutions are required, scientists have done the initial research and have a sense of the potential outcomes.

Robock said, "We may discover dangerous consequences we never thought of before. Or, we may find that particular geoengineering scenarios reduce the risk of global warming more than the additional risks they present. This will allow us to make an informed decision some time in the future when we are faced with dangerous ."

Explore further: Climate change: Can geoengineering satisfy everyone?

Related Stories

Climate change: Can geoengineering satisfy everyone?

September 15, 2010

Reflecting sunlight from the Earth by geoengineering would undoubtedly cool the climate, but would different countries agree on how much to reflect? Research by climate scientists at the University of Bristol shows that the ...

Geoengineering plan is criticized

August 24, 2007

U.S. scientists criticized a geoengineering proposal that would emulate volcanic eruptions as a means of combating global warming.

What impact would sun dimming have on Earth's weather?

January 24, 2011

Solar radiation management projects, also known as sun dimming, seek to reduce the amount of sunlight hitting the Earth to counteract the effects of climate change. Global dimming can occur as a side-effect of fossil fuels ...

Computer model looks at cooling the Earth

September 14, 2006

A U.S. computer model study suggests two unusual methods, including injecting sulfates into the atmosphere, might be used to stabilize the Earth's climate.

Recommended for you

Weather anomalies accelerate the melting of sea ice

January 16, 2018

In the winter of 2015/16, something happened that had never before been seen on this scale: at the end of December, temperatures rose above zero degrees Celsius for several days in parts of the Arctic. Temperatures of up ...


Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

3.2 / 5 (13) Aug 22, 2011
This article is like those ad campaigns for some fantastic new product that can change the world, only we aren't given the name of it or really any idea of what it is. But we need it, now, or horrible things will happen!

I've always been suspicious of the AGW crowd's need to drum up "market awareness" by appealing to fear. Manipulating public psychology isn't part of the scientific method, it's the tool of politics and fraud.
1.8 / 5 (5) Aug 22, 2011
"Manipulating public psychology isn't part of the scientific method, it's the tool of politics and fraud." - Fraud

Well said Fraud. Well said.
4.1 / 5 (10) Aug 22, 2011
geoengineering is a dangerous pursuit and I think our leaders and scientists need some medication to fix that meglomaniacal and narcisstic behaviour they've been exhibiting, especially over this past decade. Their pursuit of geoengineering could really bring about some misery and suffering for all of mankind. There is a bigger chance of a mistake or oversight than there is of an unmitigated success, look at what history has to say on the subject of when scientists and politicians play god.
3.5 / 5 (10) Aug 22, 2011
"The equivalent of Mount Pinatubo going off every year,"

Mt Pinatubo dropped temperatures by .5C.

They are going to kill billions of people with this stupid idea.
2 / 5 (4) Aug 22, 2011
By inventing the lightening rod there were those-and they were many-who accused Franklin of "playing God". (Does that sound familiar?) They believed that Franklin, by directing lightening into the ground was adversely affecting divine balances between the heavens and the earth. He was roundly condemned in his time for doing so by many very prominent clergy, including the pastor of Boston's influential South Church, Thomas Prince.
2.5 / 5 (4) Aug 22, 2011
big difference between a lightning rod and krakatoa II the man made experiment
2 / 5 (2) Aug 23, 2011
"messing with" the environment

Intentional or otherwise. Sure dangerous . But thinking about it is not and who knows we may be forced to do something someday .
2.3 / 5 (3) Aug 23, 2011
forced by whom?
1 / 5 (4) Aug 23, 2011
There is only one way this can occur, under a socialist world govt. Because when geoengineering starts killing people the govt will need to ban any liability lawsuits.
Cloud seeding was discontinued in the US primarily over legal liability concerns.
3.7 / 5 (3) Aug 23, 2011
forced by whom?

By circumstances

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.