backtop


Print 32 comment(s) - last by LBID.. on Oct 24 at 2:28 PM


  (Source: physorg.com)
Solar geoengineering involves techniques like creating low-altitude marine clouds or increasing the aerosol concentrations in the stratosphere

Much like tailoring different articles of clothing to match the weather, a new study suggests customizing solar geoengineering to compliment the needs of different regions in an effort to combat global warming.
 
Solar geoengineering is a method of fighting global warming by reflecting sunlight back into space. Solar geoengineering involves techniques like creating low-altitude marine clouds or increasing the aerosol concentrations in the stratosphere.
 
A group of researchers from the California Institute of Technology, the Carnegie Institution for Science and the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) have created a study that shows how tailored solar geoengineering can help certain regions fight global warming as needed rather than a uniform method of solar geoengineering -- which could negatively affect weather in certain areas. 
 
Some are opposed to solar geoengineering because it can affect weather around the world. For instance, greenhouse gases suppress precipitation, and reflecting a certain amount of sunlight back into space would not restore this precipitation. Greenhouse gases and aerosols affect Earth's heat and rain in different areas in different ways. With limited sunlight, everything could change and have dramatic consequences.
 
But that's where tailored solar geoengineering comes in. Different regions would only receive the amount of reflection needed to keep weather stable, yet reduce causes of global warming. The researchers used a model to predict how this would work, and found that reflecting sunlight away from the Earth based on region and season could help fight global warming without seriously affecting weather. 
 
"There has been a lot of loose talk about region-specific climate modification," said the study. "By contrast, our research uses a more systematic approach to understand how geoengineering might be used to limit a specific impact. We found that tailored solar geoengineering might limit Arctic sea ice loss with several times less total solar shading than would be needed in a uniform case." 
 
However, the researchers did add that solar radiation management could produce uncertain outcomes.

Source: Science Daily



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: You better damn well HOPE it's warming
By praktik on 10/23/2012 2:55:01 PM , Rating: 2
You've found the hole!

In all this time why hasn't any of these climate fearmongers considered the natural cycles of the earth like ice ages??

Oh wait... they have... and supply evidence that demonstrates the anthropological vector that is feeding into the cycles of the planet.

The question isn't about people ignoring ice ages, that's a pretty basic historical fact no one disputes.

What people DO dispute is the degree to which anthropological factors explain current trends - or not.

So your "cynical chuckle" - believe it or not - is matched by "heavy sighs" on the other side when they hear people trot our hockey sticks and ice ages and solar influences to hand-wave away human causes.


RE: You better damn well HOPE it's warming
By LBID on 10/23/2012 3:33:54 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
So your "cynical chuckle" - believe it or not - is matched by "heavy sighs" on the other side when they hear people trot our hockey sticks and ice ages and solar influences to hand-wave away human causes.


Engrish? I'm not sure if you had a point there, but it was lost in that mashup of failed metaphors.

As for 'supplying evidence', I'm afraid that 'hoping your theories and beliefs have some actual basis in fact' does not qualify. Ol' mother Terra has seen far worse events than humanity come and go, thinking that we have more of an impact seems to me the height of hubris.


RE: You better damn well HOPE it's warming
By praktik on 10/23/2012 4:44:11 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
As for 'supplying evidence', I'm afraid that 'hoping your theories and beliefs have some actual basis in fact' does not qualify.


That would be foolish indeed! More hand-waving without much substance. Which climate scientists are "hoping" instead of offering evidence?

Its easy to make sweeping statements about an entire body of science, more difficult to actually take the time to analyze and fight against your internal confirmation bias.


By Tyndel on 10/23/2012 7:11:07 PM , Rating: 2
According to a recent Met Office report we have not increased in temp in the last 16 years back to 1997. that is equal to the previous 16 years of warming we saw that ended the fears of the 70s of a new ice age.

Phil Jones said in 2009 that no upward trend has to continue for 15 years before he would start to get "worried" but now insists that a 16 year pause is insignificant. He is the head of Climatic Research Unit at the University of East Anglia.

There is science and there is "science" with an agenda. I consider myself a healthy skeptic and seek to find fault with new "science" rather then take everything I hear as gospel. You know kind of how a scientist is supposed to approach new things.

There was a daily mail article on this a bit back.


By LBID on 10/24/2012 2:28:15 PM , Rating: 2
Still waiting for this vaunted evidence that humanity is making the earth get warmer. One would surmise that the wait will be long, as no such credible evidence exists.


"The whole principle [of censorship] is wrong. It's like demanding that grown men live on skim milk because the baby can't have steak." -- Robert Heinlein














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki