Every day, the reality of climate change is front-page news. Temperature records are being broken. Wildfires are raging. There is no indication that things will return to normal. They will only get worse.
We hoped that technology would solve our crisis last year when the world was in turmoil due to the onset of a pandemic. The vaccine was a technological intervention that was administered to billions of people. Can we (should) we? Are there technological solutions for our climate crisis?
Holly Jean Buck poses this question in her 2019 book After Geoengineering. Climate Tragedy, Repair, and Restoration. Buck, a professor of environment at University of Buffalo, is honest in her assessment. The speed of climate change and humanity's insufficiency in its current response have effectively made the decision for us. We will need to engage in geoengineering, which is a broad term that covers various methods of intentional, global-scale climate intervention, whether we like or not.
Geoengineering is a term that refers to all the ways humans can alter our climate by making interventions. Geoengineering can be divided into two types: carbon engineering, which seeks to remove carbon from the atmosphere and solar engineering which aims at reflecting solar energy away.
She said that we were in a climate crisis. Mitigation doesn't move fast enough. Adaptation requires far more support than it gets. We must remove carbon from the atmosphere.
How much? Buck estimates that there are hundreds of billions of gigatons. We have emitted so many, but now we have so much legacy. It is not enough to reduce emissions. We also need to remove the carbon already there. This massive cleanup is what we must do this century.
Many environmentalists find the idea of intentionally altering climate a frightening and unpleasant proposition. Buck says that climate engineering is on the horizon, regardless of whether or not we like it. She says that if people on the environmental left who care about climate change reject all of the approaches, it would be a grave error to lose the ability shape them.
Geoengineering can be described as the simplest form. This is the method of removing carbon from the atmosphere that many of us have learned in school. Buck states that land-based solutions will be crucial, particularly in the next decade. They can be implemented quickly, and are easy to implement. Buck also points out other land-based climate interventions she believes are promising. To store more carbon in dirt, it is possible to change agricultural practices. You can also store carbon in wetlands or ocean iron fertilization. There are other strategies, too, such as rock weathering.
Buck states that land-based solutions are a good start, but not enough. We would need to change how we use land to plant enough trees to absorb enough carbon to cool the planet. This would affect our economy and make many aspects of our lives completely new. There are also other dangers to too heavily relying on land-based methods.
Buck says that many land-based methods are susceptible to climate change. These removals are not something you want to be wiped out by a wildfire.
However, land-based solutions may not be the only solution. Industrial technologies can also remove carbon. Buck cites a method of carbon mitigation called geological carbon cap, which is widely used to reduce emissions from polluting industries. A factory could be outfitted with scrubbers that collect carbon dioxide. You then inject the carbon underground into a cavern and keep it there for a long time. It is important to keep it under control to ensure it remains where you want.
Injecting large amounts carbon into rocks poses risks. Buck laments the unregulated wild west atmosphere that fracking created, which has caused earthquakes in certain parts of the US. However, scientists have learned that there are technologies to preserve underground carbon. New techniques could make it safer to capture geological carbon. Buck says there is a lot more research on how carbon dioxide can be converted into rock faster once it's injected underground.
This carbon mitigation technique has proven to be effective in reducing industrial emissions. It has also been used for decades so that science and safety are well known. Bucks hopes that this technology will be able to be used for more than just reducing carbon emissions.
Buck states that carbon removal is different from mitigation when you remove carbon from the air. Machines are available that can remove carbon from the air. The carbon can then be transported underground and stored. The technique can be used without these machines to make bioenergy. This involves creating biomass, a plant that is very carbon-dense, and then combusting it at power plants. After that, it's separated out and stored underground.
Buck believes this strategy, which uses a variety of carbon-engineering methods to inject carbon deep under rock, is the most efficient and safest. If humanity doesn't act quickly, climate mitigation strategies may be more risky. Buck states that if we don't remove carbon and decarbonize and reform our land use and transportation systems and change industrial systems quickly enough, there is a possibility that people will suggest solar geoengineering.
The solar geoengineering technique is a form of climate mitigation that has been largely theoretical. It involves blocking some of the incoming sunlight and sending it back into space. This creates a cooling effect. Special planes are used to inject gas into stratosphere. The particles of gas would reflect sunlight away, altering both the amount and quality of sunlight reaching earth.
This type of geoengineering could cool the planet for at least a few months. It would not address the main problem of too much carbon in our atmosphere. Buck says it doesn't address the root problem. It does not remove emissions. It is a blanket of intentionally polluted air that cools down the environment.
Buck also believes that solar geoengineering could create additional problems. What would a different type of sunlight do for humans or other living things? What impact would this have on agriculture and food supply? We don't know. What about food shortages? Is the sky still blue? These answers are not available, so solar geoengineering is a risky endeavor until they are.
Buck is so optimistic that humanity can live in a sustainable future without the need for solar geoengineering. It was more than I had expected. She has a vision. This would require global cooperation and massive infrastructure overhauls. This would require the United States and other capitalist nations to shift their economic focus to a more centrally planned economy that is less focused on maximizing growth and more focused on minimizing carbon. This would require overcoming political differences across the globe and competing motivations in order to unite for a global cause.
Buck believes that there are enough incentives to cooperate in the existential climate intervention program to at least ensure some success.
She believes that people can agree on how to achieve a common goal if they share it. But maybe having the common goal is sufficient.
One of the greatest clean-up operations in history may be the removal of carbon from our atmosphere. It could happen within our lifetimes. If Buck is correct, the best time to begin it is now.
