WASHINGTON, April 8, 2009
"Geoengineering" To Fight Global Warming?
Radical Approaches Being Considered, Obama's Science Adviser Says In First Interview
-
-
Receding glacial ice in Greenland.President Obama's science adviser John Holdren said the U.S. has not ruled out using "geoengineering" to stem global warming, though it remains a last resort. (Extreme Ice Survey)
-
John Holdren talks about his role as President Obama's science adviser during an interview with The Associated Press, in Washington, Wednesday, April 8, 2009. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite)
-
-
Play CBS Video Video Global Warming Heats Up Using the Arctic as an early warning system, scientists are claiming the amount of greenhouse gas emissions worldwide is higher than predicted. Daniel Sieberg reports.
-
Interactive Global Warming The greenhouse effect, a look at the Kyoto Protocol and a history of the Earth's climate.
-
Photo Essay Lights Out Landmarks across Europe go dark to call attention to climate change
That's because global warming is happening so rapidly, John Holdren told The Associated Press in his first interview since being confirmed last month.
The concept of using technology to purposely cool the climate is called geoengineering. One option raised by Holdren and proposed by a Nobel Prize-winning scientist includes shooting pollution particles into the upper atmosphere to reflect the sun's rays.
Using such an experimental measure is only being thought of as a last resort, Holdren said.
"It's got to be looked at," he said. "We don't have the luxury ... of ruling any approach off the table."
His concern is that the United States and other nations won't slow global warming fast enough and that several "tipping points" could be fast approaching. Once such milestones are reached, such as complete loss of summer sea ice in the Arctic, it increases chances of "really intolerable consequences," he said.
Twice in a half-hour interview, Holdren compared global warming to being "in a car with bad brakes driving toward a cliff in the fog."
He and many experts believe that warming of a few degrees more would lead to disastrous drought conditions and food shortages in some regions, rising seas and more powerful coastal storms in others.
At first, Holdren characterized the potential need to technologically tinker with the climate as just his personal view. However, he went on to say he has raised it in administration discussions.
"We're talking about all these issues in the White House," Holdren said. "There's a very vigorous process going on of discussing all the options for addressing the energy climate challenge."
Holdren said discussions include Cabinet officials and heads of sub-Cabinet level agencies, such as NASA and the Environmental Protection Agency.
The 65-year-old physicist is far from alone in taking geoengineering seriously. The National Academy of Sciences is making it the subject of the first workshop in its new climate challenges program for policymakers, scientists and the public. The British Parliament has also discussed the idea. At an international meeting of climate scientists last month in Copenhagen, 15 talks dealt with different aspects of geoengineering.
The American Meteorological Society is crafting a policy statement that says "it is prudent to consider geoengineering's potential, to understand its limits and to avoid rash deployment."
Last week, Princeton scientist Robert Socolow told the National Academy that geoengineering should be an available option in case climate worsens dramatically.
Holdren, a 1981 winner of a MacArthur Foundation "genius" grant, outlined these possible geoengineering options:
The first approach would "try to produce a cooling effect to offset the heating effect of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases," Holdren said.
But he said there could be grave side effects. Studies suggest that might include eating away a large chunk of the ozone layer above the poles and causing the Mediterranean and the Mideast to be much drier.
And those are just the predicted problems. Scientists say they worry about side effects that they don't anticipate.
Fast Fact
While the idea could strike some people as too risky, the Obama administration could get unusual support on the idea from groups that have often denied the harm of global warming in the past.
Using technology to purposely cool the climate is called geoengineering. One option raised by Holdren and proposed by a Nobel Prize-winning scientist includes shooting pollution particles into the atmosphere to reflect the sun's rays.
The conservative think tank American Enterprise Institute has its own geoengineering project, saying it could be "feasible and cost-effective." And Cato Institute scholar Jerry Taylor said Wednesday: "Very few people would rule out geoengineering on its face."
Holdren didn't spell out under what circumstances such extreme measures might ever be called for. And he emphasized they are not something to rely on.
"It would be preferable by far," he said, "to solve this problem by reducing emissions of greenhouse gases."
Yet there is already significant opposition building to the House Democratic leaders' bill aimed at achieving President Barack Obama's goal of cutting greenhouse gas emissions 20 percent by 2020 and 80 percent by 2050.
Holdren said temperatures should be kept from rising more than 3.6 degrees. To get there, he said the U.S. and other industrial nations have to begin permanent dramatic cuts in carbon dioxide pollution by 2015, with developing countries following suit within a decade.
Those efforts are racing against three tipping points he cited: Earth could be as close as six years away from the loss of Arctic summer sea ice, he said, and that has the potential of altering the climate in unforeseen ways. Other elements that could dramatically speed up climate change include the release of frozen methane from thawing permafrost in Siberia, and more and bigger wildfires worldwide.
The trouble is that no one knows when these things are coming, he said.
Holdren also addressed other topics during the interview:
The administration will "rebalance NASA's programs so that we have in space exploration, a suitable mix of manned activities and robotic activities," Holdren said. Doing that "will only get under way in earnest when a new administrator is in place."
Holdren, who advises the president on such decisions, said he hopes Obama will pick a new NASA boss soon.
© MMIX The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
More From SciTech
Add a Comment See all 39 Comments
- markavelli: virtually EVERY climate prediction or research study you read comes from a computer model simulation (its always stated in the report itself).
So? Do you suggest they build alternative earths to run experiments? Are you nuts? For better or worse, computer models are about the only way to make climate predictions. Moreover, these models are steadily improving as computers become more powerful, and as they are adjusted to take into account the successes and failures of their predictions and retrodictions. Anyone who would fudge their model to get desired results would be committing professional suicide--they would be anathema in the scientific community. That's part of the reason the oil company shills are not trusted. - Reply to this comment
- markavelli: "The greenhouse effect is being put to the test these days. and it has failed many times. For instance, from 1940 to 1970 the earth cooled, yet co2 skyrocketed."
Yes, because we were putting enormous amounts of aerosols into the atmosphere. Scientists in 1970 knew that aerosols were cooling the earth while CO2 was warming it. The only question was which would dominate. As aerosol production has been reduced and CO2 increased since then, the balance has tipped firmly towards warming. This, btw, is exactly the scenario considered most likely back then (although everyone knew enough to hedge their bets until more data came in). - Reply to this comment
- The greenhouse effect is being put to the test these days. and it has failed many times. For instance, from 1940 to 1970 the earth cooled, yet co2 skyrocketed.
This whole global warming theory is based on the greenhouse effect and exists only in computer models, which are terribly innacurate.
virtually EVERY climate prediction or research study you read comes from a computer model simulation (its always stated in the report itself). This sure give scientists a lot of power for propaganda. They can create any future scenario they want. And being that they are getting $$$ to do their research, expect dramatic results with whatever they are working on. - Reply to this comment
- "you must realize that SOMETHING is happening;whether man made or not"
It is foolish to take drastic and dramatic action before you know what action to take.
Scientists are debating the man made theory now more than ever. Pointless to going extremes fighting this knowing that it can all be for not... - Reply to this comment
- You people are funny.
- Reply to this comment
- Wow the wealth of stupidity is staggering...you know who you are: those of you who live in a backwater, podunk town and whose lives mean nothing to the greater world-at-large. whether or not global warming is occuring (and the person who commented on global cooling....you're an idiot) you must realize that SOMETHING is happening;whether man made or not, the planets' temperature IS changing.it has happened before and will continue to happen.not a scare tactic created by liberals or a cover-up conspiracy activated by evil republicans...its just happening.so deal with it. in the course of the history of this planet it has proven itself to be most resilient and unstoppable, nothing we do will ever damage it beyond repair.we will be the ones,actually, left to suffer its machinations. so before you turn away and try to ignore scientific evidence- such as the importance and fragility of thermohaline circulation or the warning issued by the World Meterological Organization far back in 1976- think about Newton's 3rd law (those of you who didn't pay attention in school and are otherwise useless...pay attention): "EVERY action has an equal and opposite REACTION".to think that the presence of a species of OVER 6 billion has had no effect on its environment and to state that we needn't do anything illustrates that you people are not only ignorant but morally vapid please leave your conjecture where it deserves to be: in your small, useless minds and let the people with the big brains and the ability to actually form cohesive sentences do what needs to be done...for you ignorance truly is bliss....
- Reply to this comment
- 8 years of Global cooling and they are still trying to sell this pile of crap.
- Reply to this comment
- "Shooting sulfur particles (like those produced by power plants and volcanoes, for example) into the upper atmosphere, an idea that gained steam when it was proposed by Nobel laureate Paul Crutzen in 2006. It would be "basically mimicking the effect of volcanoes in screening out the incoming sunlight," Holdren said. "
In the 1970's in the heat of polution, scientist's said the world was getting "colder"
The wanted to place dust in the upper atmosphere to slow Golobol cooling.
They were nuts then.
They are nusts now.
It's all about follow the grant $$$ - Reply to this comment
- And the funny thing is the dummy liberals are always calling the Conservatives the "fear mongers", yet they are the ones who are trying to impose their manufactured fear on the rest of the world with this global warming crapp, and continue to do so.
The hypocrisy is well noted! - Reply to this comment
- As usual the liberal dummies are trying to push their propaganda global warming crappola on the rest of the world, in an effort to suck more money out of the tax-payer.
There are hundreds if not thousands of scientists who oppose man-made global warming on this planet, yet their voices are being silenced by the Liberal dictatorship media and Obama regime! - Reply to this comment
International recording artist Shakira on love, career and more.
