Donald Trump may back dangerous 'wall in the sky' plan to fight climate change, warns watchdog
Experts
at Harvard University say it may take too long for the world to
switch to renewable energy so 'solar geoengineering' should be
investigated
29
March, 2017
A
controversial plan to create a “wall in the sky” to reflect
sunlight could win support from the Trump administration because it
appears to offer a way to keep burning fossil fuels while reducing
global warming, campaigners have said.
A
team of Harvard University scientists led by Professor David Keith
plans to begin a trial of a so-called ‘geoengineering’ project
next year.
This
will involve spraying fine particles of water and various materials,
such as sulphur dioxide, from a high-altitude balloon.
It
is thought doing this on a large scale would cool the planet in a
similar way to the effect of the lightest debris produced by volcanic
eruptions.
However
such ideas are controversial with the United Nations Convention on
Biological Diversity agreeing in December that its moratorium on
climate geoengineering should remain in place.
This
is partly because such measures could have unintended consequences,
such as causing drought in the Sahel region of Africa, as one
scientific study suggested.
After
the Harvard team unveiled their plans, Silvia Riberio, Latin America
director at technology watchdog ETC Group, told the Guardian:
“Clearly parts of the Trump administration are very willing to open
the door to reckless schemes like David Keith’s, and may well have
quietly given the nod to open-air experiments.
“Worryingly,
geoengineering may emerge as this administration’s preferred
approach to global warming.
“In
their view, building a big beautiful wall of sulphate in the sky
could be a perfect excuse to allow uncontrolled fossil fuel
extraction.
“We
need to be focussing on radical emissions cuts, not dangerous and
unjust technofixes.”
Professor
Daniel Schrag, of Harvard, said in a promotional video about their
planned trial: “One aspect of the climate problem that people
sometimes don’t appreciate is the timescale – the fact that a
large fraction of the carbon we are putting in the atmosphere will
still be there thousands, even tens of thousands, of years from now.”
But
switching from fossil fuels to renewables, he claimed, would take
“many decades and probably much more than a century”.
“Many
of us who have looked at the energy systems of the world and the
climate system have a feeling we may actually not be able to switch
our energy system over in time to prevent the worst consequences of
climate change,” Professor Schrag said.
“This
is really why solar geoengineering is, I think, an important thing to
look at very carefully.”
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.