How Climate Change Reversal Efforts Could Destroy Our Planet

Nature Communications is a highly regarded scientifically-relative group that studies the complex relationships between the Earth's climate, flora and fauna, and the people on the planet, including our habits and behaviors.

Since the newest craze among the Global Warming zombies is that Earthlings must commit to reversing the horrifying effects of the human race on our poor Mother Earth, they have been offering alternative ways than just your average reducing your carbon footprint.  Many are now suggesting that a much more rigorous and aggressive method is necessary, since it appears to them through their smog-colored glasses that nothing we're currently doing is making any difference.  Hence, the suggestion that we begin geoengineering; that is, committing to altering the natural landscape and environment by pumping out substances, chemicals and minerals into our atmosphere, earth, and water in order to reverse the damage done by people with unnaturally-occurring levels of pollutants.

David Keith

Here's one example from Harvard Professor David Keith :

Here is the plan. Customize several Gulfstream business jets with military engines and with equipment to produce and disperse fine droplets of sulfuric acid. Fly the jets up around 20 kilometers—significantly higher than the cruising altitude for a commercial jetliner but still well within their range. At that altitude in the tropics, the aircraft are in the lower stratosphere. The planes spray the sulfuric acid, carefully controlling the rate of its release. The sulfur combines with water vapor to form sulfate aerosols, fine particles less than a micrometer in diameter. These get swept upward by natural wind patterns and are dispersed over the globe, including the poles. Once spread across the stratosphere, the aerosols will reflect about 1 percent of the sunlight hitting Earth back into space. Increasing what scientists call the planet’s albedo, or reflective power, will partially offset the warming effects caused by rising levels of greenhouse gases.

Kenneth Caldeira

Another example of this insanity comes from Kenneth Caldeira from the Carnegie Institution:

 Geoengineering really did seem to operate more or less like a planetwide thermostat. As the resulting paper noted, Wood's proposal might have any number of adverse environmental and ecological consequences, but it also might offer real benefits. “Melting of Greenland and Antarctic ice caps and the consequent sea level rise,” Caldeira and Govindasamy wrote in the spring 2000 issue of Geophysical Research Letters, “is less likely to occur in a geoengineered world.”

Another possible side effect is acid rain. But sulfur dioxide pollution from coal-burning power plants, one of the prime causes of acid rain in the past, never reaches the stratosphere — it remains in the atmosphere's lowest layer, the troposphere, and rains out quickly as a result. The stratospheric sulfate from geoengineering would stay up longer and be more stable, so we would need less of it to begin with, which somewhat weakens the acid rain argument.

But the deepest concern is that at a fundamental level we would be messing with a complex and incompletely understood system, one that — even in the most powerful computer models — can be rendered only partially. There will undoubtedly be unexpected results — the “unknown unknowns,” as climate scientists call them. That's why critics like Robock and prominent atmospheric-sciences historian James Rodger Fleming want to avoid “playing God with the elements,” to use Fleming's phrase.

Confused yet?

Don't worry…you're not the only one.  These fanatics have decided that in order for them to save this planet, they will now have to artificially provide the Earth with substances it wouldn't normally provide for itself (because obviously, they know better than the ecosystem of a planet that's been around for eons) in order to help the planet to heal itself.

Turn the page to see the results of a new study that predicts what would happen if such dangerous propositions were carried out:

Next Page »



  1. Tess

Leave a Reply

Pin It on Pinterest