|
It’s only 10 days until Christmas, and a week until winter, so it seems like the perfect time to write about keeping cool when it’s warm out.
 Of course, I’m not talking about central air conditioning or a summer’s day at the lake. Instead, I’m referring to the omnipresent, environmental boogie man known as global warming. There are political and scientific debates about the veracity and extent of global warming (as well as the boogie man), but because we’re selling science here, let’s stick to the facts.
- According to NASA, who is among the best sources you can get: “Ninety-seven percent of climate scientists agree that climate-warming trends over the past century are very likely due to human activities.”
- NOAA says that 2015 was the warmest year on record.
- Environment Canada says, “Warming over the 20th century is indisputable and largely due to human activities. Canada's rate of warming is about twice the global rate.”
- From the UK’s Meteorological Office: “Scientific research shows that the climate—that is, the average temperature of the planet's surface—has risen by 0.89 °C from 1901 to 2012. Compared with climate change patterns throughout Earth's history, the rate of temperature rise since the Industrial Revolution is extremely high.”
- In December 2015, after years of mocking climate change, Russian President V. Putin said, “Climate change has become one of the gravest challenges humanity is facing.”
- Lastly, the Chinese Meteorological Administration’s official stance: “Climate change has led to a shortage of water resources, extensive droughts, sea level rise, glacier retreat, desertification, food output fluctuation and epidemic disease…This affects the survival and development of mankind, and deeply hinders our security.”
Only in 2016 would I need to dedicate 200 words to providing climate change evidence. Moving on…
So yes, as a single-planet species, humankind’s greatest existential threat is arguably climate change. Many, many regulations and laws have been passed worldwide to ease atmospheric pollution and greenhouse gases, which are the main contributors to climate change. Yet, it is still not enough.
 So, researchers have occasionally proposed dispersing light-reflective sulfate aerosols into the stratosphere to reduce the intensity of light. Of course, the main drawback is that sulfate aerosols actually damage the ozone layer, which will lead to extra UV rays reaching the Earth’s surface.
Researchers at the Harvard John A. Paulson School of Engineering and Applied Sciences have been studying what materials would be substitutable for sulfate aerosols. In research published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, the team announced they have begun testing calcite particles as a possible solution. Calcite could neutralize acidic compounds in the atmosphere to protect the ozone layer, while also reflecting enough sunlight to cool the planet.
The research team cautions that it’s too early to tell if calcite will prove viable, as stratospheric science isn’t mature enough to offer modeling. However, lab tests are ongoing.
On one hand, atmospheric engineering is a stop-gap solution that might ultimately delay larger atmospheric sustainability initiatives. (Hey, more time to drill for oil!) It might be better as a Plan B, should climate change reach a tipping point.
On the other hand, the battle against climate change needs every weapon in its arsenal at its disposal.
If the real answer to climate change is pollution reduction, do Band-Aid solutions make sense?
| 
8
Re: Could Aerosols Reverse the Tides of Climate Change?
Comments rated to be Good Answers:
Comments rated to be "almost" Good Answers: