For years the idea of engineering the climate has been approached with great caution, since it involves a gigantic expense with unknown benefits and risks. "Climate engineering is a very risky thing," Caldeira told Discovery News. "But increasing greenhouse gas emissions is also very risky." There are cases in which the effects of our accidental climate engineering, via greenhouse gases, can only be reversed by some kind of engineering. The plight of polar bears is one example. Thick perennial Arctic sea ice is disappearing fast, taking with it polar bear habitat. No amount of carbon emission reductions today will change that trend for decades or even centuries to come. Engineering may be the polar bear's only hope, Caldeira explained. That said, engineering is not really a solution, said climate scientist David Victor, also at Stanford University. "It's a tourniquet," Victor told Discovery News. "It's not a substitute for fixing the original wound. It might be part of a suite of actions." In the end, said Caldeira, humanity faces three options with regards to global warming: 1) Reduce greenhouse gases drastically and immediately, 2) Adapt to a warmer planet, and 3) engineer the climate. "I think there is a good chance we're going to end up doing a bit of all three of them," Caldeira said. Related Links: Howstuffworks.com: Carbon Capture Treeugger: Royal Society Launches Large-Scale Review of Geoengineering Proposals |
advertisement
|
-
our sites
-
video
mobile
-
shop
-
stay connected
-
corporate
