Monumental plans to fix the planet

Image from NASA.

When Congress directs the White House Office of Science and Technology (OSTP) to coordinate with other relevant federal agencies to seek a five-year scientific assessment of solar and other rapid climate interventions, it does not is all too evident that the highest levels of government have gotten the internal memo that the climate is in trouble. Even so, they’re still late to the party.

Scientists have been warning of the consequences of excessive CO2 levels and urging Congress and the White House to act for decades.

Now that the broken climate system has been recognized as a serious threat, as a general rule, if something is broken, it can be fixed. There is no other plausible outcome. Otherwise, it wouldn’t have been possible to build it in the first place, or seen in another way, if it can be built, it can be fixed.

But is it possible to fix a broken climate system? That is to say, the system on which we all depend for the maintenance of life. But, we didn’t build it. Yet we broke it. Thus, it does not conform to the axiom: “If it can be built, it can be fixed”. Ergo, this may be a bigger challenge than the current scramble to find solutions to build fast enough to turn down the heat.

In this sense, there are a wealth of readily available facts to prove that the climate system is truly broken (a long list is available upon request). Of most concern is the degradation of various ecosystems, but not all, which is occurring much sooner at such a low +1.2°C global average temperature change above the pre-industrial period than anyone thought possible. At just +1.2°C, the planet’s life support, which is our only life support, is at an undetermined level of risk, and no one knows how soon the major blackout will occur, estimates range. from (a) in this decade to (b) beyond this century. All of this raises the awkward consideration that scientists’ models have been off-target by a country mile for the past few decades. They are almost always too conservative and overwhelmed by real climate change. They’re late for the holidays.

Nevertheless, there are many climatologists, engineers, physicists who say: “Yes, this can be solved via the engineering of the climate system”. In fact, they are currently sending recommendations to the White House Office of Science and Technology. It’s really urgent.

While it is interesting to note that in fact human influence has already modified or geo-modified the climate system by altering the composition or chemistry of the atmosphere with massive emissions of greenhouse gases, the CO2 for example.

Engineering, or is it geoengineering, the climate system is a yes/no problem among experts and non-experts, maybe no, and it’s controversial enough to inspire loud cries and physical threats . It’s wild out there in the provocative world of “pro or anti” geoengineering.

Depending on who you meet at the airport bar and grill and strike up a conversation about geoengineering, it’s either feared, ridiculed, praised, or punched in the face, no soft opinions in between. There are websites dedicated to the study of geoengineering. Conspiracy theories abound. And, there are serious research programs going on at major universities around the world like MIT and Harvard and Stanford and Cambridge.

“Relevant scientific research on direct climate cooling methods and technologies currently being conducted include sea cloud thinning, stratospheric aerosol injection, sea ice freezing, thermal energy conversion oceans, oceanic and glacial microspheres, terrestrial and atmospheric mirrors, thinning cirrus clouds, iron salt aerosols, and white reflective roofs and streets (Source: Suzanne Reed, Healthy Planet Action Coalition, Compilation of Comments Submitted to the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy Regarding the United States Climate Response Study by HPAC and Affiliated Organizations and IndividualsSeptember 9, 2022)

In the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2022, the White House Office of Science and Technology (OSTP), in coordination with other relevant federal agencies, was instructed by Congress to seek a scientific assessment of five years of solar and other rapid climate interventions in the context of long-term climate risks and hazards. In other words, key people at the highest levels have received the disturbing message that climate change is an extremely serious matter and a threat to stable ways of life.

The assessment will address: “(1) the objectives of scientific research (2) the capabilities needed to model, analyze, observe and monitor atmospheric composition (3) climate impacts and the planet’s radiation balance (4) what that is necessary for the coordination of federal research and investments needed to provide assessment at the point of managing near-term climate risk as well as climate response research,” Ibid.

Evaluation, as noted above, is the long version of saying: We have a serious problem that requires immediate attention.

A fixed labeled program The climate triad is brought to you by the Healthy Planet Action Coalition (HPAC), which is a diverse international coalition of scientists, engineers, technologists, and public policy buffs. HPAC recommends a coordinated program involving (1) Direct Climate Cooling, DCC (2) Reduction of Greenhouse Gas Emissions (3) Removal of Greenhouse Gases, GHGR. All three should be treated as equal priorities in an effort to keep global average temperatures below pre-industrial 1.5°C (when did it start?).

The tone of the fixit message is that of the urgency to deploy direct climate cooling “now necessary to reduce current and near-term damage and risk to humans and other species from current and near-term future levels of the global warming”, Ibid.

As such, and with even greater urgency, the coalition is asking the White House to work to shorten the proposed five-year research and implementation plan by accelerating it to one to two years. Implicit in this urgent request, coalition members evidently believe that climate change is so dangerously proactive that mitigation efforts must begin as soon as possible, which reinforces the HPAC’s request to start by compressing the timeline to 1-2 years from the five-year plan as stated by Congress.

For a list of HPAC proposals or to join their efforts, go to:

For example, the coalition submitted a menu of 15 proposed climate cooling approaches, such as: (a) thinning of cirrus clouds (b) ice shields to thicken polar ice (c) injection of stratospheric aerosols . And, of the utmost importance, polar refreezing is considered a top priority in support of national and international security objectives, protection of biodiversity, reduction of extreme weather events and raising the level of the sea.

At the top of the HPAC list: “Arctic amplification (with up to four times the temperature rise of the equator) and the role of Arctic sea ice in regulating climate by the jet stream and ocean currents make the Arctic Circle the most serious planetary problem. warming risk and cooling priority”, Ibid.

This sense of urgency about climate change and the big push by Congress for the White House to take a leadership role in a massive attempt to fix the climate system is a positive testament to the influence of a Democratic-led Congress. . There is no other way to see things. What is the GOP position?

Yet there are two sides to this rushed and hopeful rescue plan. One side is almost 100% certain that human engineering of the climate system will be positive, and thus the only way out of a sticky climate change/global warming problematic quagmire.

The other side believes that an artificially (human) engineered climate system is destined to trigger unintended negative consequences that could spiral out of control.

And, to all appearances, some aspects of the climate system are already out of control. Just ask anyone in Pakistan to tell you about the Himalayan range, where global warming has hit alpine glaciers with the bursting of glacial lakes or ask the barge companies on European rivers or the hundreds of cities living off water by truck in France and Italy, or the nearly “dead” Lake Mead. pool,” and the list could go on and on. All of this is happening at unprecedented levels never seen before, signs of a disruptive or broken climate system. Nothing is normal anymore.

Naturally, it is the intended consequences (mentioned above) that create the urgency and the need for massive planetary experimentation. But, so far, almost all proposals are desktop models. The real world is waiting for the tests to hopefully lead to real results that work as intended.

If it works, it will be something to behold, kind of like a miracle.

Stay tuned!

Leave a Reply