Skip to main content

This site is using cookies to collect anonymous visitor statistics and enhance the user experience. OK | Find out more

PEO header
Main content

News

Geoengineering no quick fix for sea-level rise

24 August 2010, by Tamera Jones

Sea levels are still likely to rise by at least 30cm by the end of 2100, compared with 2000 levels, unless we use the most extreme geoengineering solutions to ease climate change while also cutting CO2 emissions, say researchers.

Space mirror

Computer artwork of a large mirror (circular) in Earth orbit. The mirror is designed to shield the Earth (lower right) from the Sun (behind mirror), in an attempt to control changes in the climate of the Earth.

This is because the huge volume of the oceans means they take a long time to react fully to atmospheric temperatures - usually about a century.

'Geoengineering could be a simple solution for global temperatures, but not for sea-level rise,' explains Dr Svetlana Jevrejeva from the National Oceanography Centre, one of the co-authors of the report. 'Even with extreme scenarios, we'd only see a small slowing of sea levels.'

Jevrejeva and colleagues from China, Finland and Denmark wanted to see how five geoengineering solutions will affect sea levels. Geoengineering falls into two main types: limiting the effect of the sun's rays, or changing the carbon cycle in some way. The former doesn't change atmospheric CO2 levels in any way, whereas the latter does.

The team used a well-established model to look at the effect of firing a large amount of sulphur dioxide into the atmosphere, putting mirrors in space, planting huge numbers of trees, biochar (turning plants into a type of charcoal in soil where they boost crop productivity) and switching to bioenergy. They investigated how these methods would affect climate change under different CO2 emissions scenarios.

They found that using bioenergy for power while capturing the emitted CO2 and storing it deep underground is likely to be the least risky and the most publicly acceptable solution to tackle climate change. This would also lead to fewer fossil fuels being burnt for energy. But this solution wouldn't be as effective as using aerosols or giant mirrors in space at slowing sea level rise.

'Even with extreme [geoengineering] scenarios, we'd only see a small slowing of sea levels.'
Dr Svetlana Jevrejeva from the National Oceanography Centre

Firing as much sulphur dioxide into the atmosphere as the eruption of Mount Pinatubo did, every 18 months, could slow sea level rise by 40 to 80 years, they discovered. But the effects of pumping so much sulphur dioxide into the sky are unknown.

'We don't know how aerosols will affect ecosystems and the climate,' says Jevrejeva. 'But they're likely to disrupt rainfall patterns and stratospheric ozone.'

Erecting mirrors in space to reflect the sun's rays, on the other hand, is a nice, clean idea and could limit sea level rise, but it would be prohibitively expensive. This isn't only because of the costs of getting the mirrors into space, but also because of the maintenance required to keep them going.

'Another problem with mirrors in space is that these kinds of geoengineering solutions do nothing to address CO2 levels in the atmosphere. If the mirrors broke down, temperatures would still rise and we'd be back to where we started,' says Jevrejeva.

Jevrejeva and her colleagues conclude that the most effective strategy to reduce the rate of sea-level rise would be to use two different approaches, such as using bioenergy as a source of fuel and capturing CO2 for long-term storage.

But if we don't use any geoengineering solutions at all, we'd see sea levels rise by 0.6 to 1.1m, says Jevrejeva.

'The most important message from this is that we still have to address the underlying problem: atmospheric CO2 levels,' she adds.

Sea-level rise could be the most damaging result of rising temperatures, with around 150 million people living within one metre of high tide across the world.

The results are published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.


J. C. Moore, S. Jevrejeva, A. Grinsted, Efficacy of geoengineering to limit 21st century sea-level rise, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, published online before print August 23, 2010, doi: 10.1073/pnas.1008153107


Keywords: , , ,


Interesting? Spread the word using the 'share' menu on the top right.


Your comments

Reverse-Geo-Engineering & Prayer

It's a real shame that biochar is grouped with "Geo-Engineering" infrastructurally impossible schemes. I would much rather see it framed as it is in this PNAS report (by a Nobel lariat) which underscores the Sea level Rise report of Biochar systems sequestration potential;

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences Reducing abrupt climate change risk using the Montreal Protocol and other regulatory actions to complement cuts in CO2 emissions

Biochar is more reverse-Geo-Engineering. This is why Dr. W.Ruddiman's work at UVA, boldly showing the atmospheric hall marks of Combustion & Ag technology engineering over 10 millenniums need mitigation, with IMHO, biochar and land-management the perfect logical choice.

Hopefully as more in-depth scrutiny and elucidation of biochar systems, relative to the other climate manipulations advanced, will bear out this truth that we just plan to but the carbon back where it came from.

I feel Terra Preta soil technology is the greatest of Ironies since Tobacco.
That is: an invention of pre-Columbian American culture, destroyed by western disease, may well be the savior of industrial western society. As inversely Tobacco, over time has gotten back at same society by killing more of us than the entire pre-Columbian population.

For those looking for an overview of biochar and its benefits, These authors have done a very nice job of distilling a great deal of information about biochar and applying it to the US context:

US-Focused Biochar report: Assessment of Biochar's Benefits for the USA

The Biochar Fund deserves your attention and support.
Exceptional results from biochar experiment in Cameroon.

Agriculture allowed our cultural ascent and Agriculture will now prevent our descent.

Erich J. Knight, McGaheysville, VA.
Wednesday, 25 August 2010 - 03:12

Wise Land management and afforestation can build back our soil carbon,
Biochar allows the soil food web to build much more recalcitrant organic carbon, (living biomass & Glomalins) in addition to the carbon in the biochar.

Every 1 ton of Biomass yields 1/3 ton Charcoal for soil Sequestration (= to 1 Ton CO2e) + Bio-Gas & Bio-oil fuels = to 1MWh exported electricity, so is a totally virtuous, carbon negative energy cycle.

Biochar viewed as soil Infrastructure; The old saw;
"Feed the Soil Not the Plants" becomes;
"Feed, Cloth and House the Soil, utilities included!".
Free Carbon Condominiums with carboxyl group fats in the pantry and hydroxyl alcohol in the mini bar.
Build it and the Wee-Beasties will come.
Microbes like to sit down when they eat.
By setting this table we expand husbandry to whole new orders & Kingdoms of life.

This is what I try to get across to Farmers, as to how I feel about the act of returning carbon to the soil. An act of penitence and thankfulness for the civilization we have created.

Biochar systems draw down CO2 every energy cycle, closing a circle back to support the soil food web. The photosynthetic "capture" collectors are up and running, the "storage" sink is in operation just under our feet. Pyrolysis conversion plants are the only infrastructure we need to build out.

The Terra Preta Prayer

Our Carbon who art in heaven,
Hallowed be thy name
By kingdom come, thy will be done, IN the Earth to make it Heaven.
It will give us each day our daily bread and forgive us our atmospheric trespasses
As we forgive those who trespass against the Kyoto protocols
And lead us not into fossil fuel temptation, but deliver us from it's evil
low as we walk through the valley of the shadow of Global Warming,
I will feel no evil, your Bio-fuels and fertile microbes will comfort me,
For thine is the fungal kingdom,
and the microbe power,
and the Sequestration Glory,
For ever and ever (well at least 2000 years)
AMEN

Erich J. Knight, McGaheysville, VA.
Wednesday, 25 August 2010 - 03:18