đ
Watch these 2 videos about geoengineering.
Do the speakers agree? What are your views on this question?
Naomi Klein from 17.06 to 18.42
Difficult vocabulary:
rapture, shoot sulphates, wackiest, 18 mile garden hose, escape hatch.
Danny Hillis from 00.55 to 4.36
Difficult vocabulary:
contrails from aeroplanes,
Images:
clouds from ships (2.22), chalk from the White Cliffs of Dover (2.30).
âď¸
Do you agree with Naomi Klein that the best idea would be to reduce or eliminate emissions or should we try to reduce the consequences of global warming?
Which is the most cost effective way?
Container ships- accidental geoengineering
overall effect- very bad
but
Now, Peter Manshausen at the University of Oxford and his colleagues have found that clouds that had appeared unaffected are in fact affected by the aerosols. The researchers mapped the paths of two million ships in the Atlantic Ocean over a six-year period and used a global database for the winds on the trade routes the ships travelled along to see where their emitted aerosols would go. They then used another database of cloud properties to see how these clouds were affected.
The researchers found that at the locations they predicted the aerosols would travel to, there were tracks of clouds with fewer droplets but more liquid water. This slightly changes the overall reflectivity of the clouds and, more importantly, a larger water-to-droplet ratio implies a stronger cooling effect, so the clouds would reflect more radiation back towards the sun.
This leads to a cooling effect from human-derived aerosols that, measured as the amount of water between two points in the atmosphere, was found to be -0.76 watts per square metre, very different from the heating effect, at 0.2 watts per square metre, in the most recent Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report.
âIf the aerosols cause the clouds to be brighter than we thought previously, that means that as we reduce air pollution for health reasons, we stand to expect more global warming from the lack of this cooling that comes from the aerosol cloud interactions,â says Manshausen.
so: we know geoengineering can âworkâ
â âaffordableâ climate âsolutionsâ â
https://carbonengineering.com/
cost of polluting in the EU-$100 per tonne
carbon capture cost $600 per tonne
Where does the other $500 come from?
âPlantâ in Notrees- 500,000 tonnes of CO2 per year.
Vicki Hollub shared that STRATOS earned its name to âconvey the real sense of scale and possibilityâ of what Oxy is working to accomplish here.
âSometimes history puts you in the right place at the right time with the tools you need to do something extraordinary. Together, we, with our partners and supporters, have seized this moment to start the deployment of large-scale Direct Air Capture around the world which will make a difference for our world, our company, and our communities.â
VICKI HOLLUB, CEO AT OCCIDENTAL
During her remarks, CEâs VP and Head of Business Development, Lori Guetre, offered a compelling comparison to the Apollo 13 missionâs seemingly-impossible challenge to engineer a CO2 scrubber in record time and to bring the astronauts home after the spacecraft had serious complications.
âThis time the earth has some serious complications, and it needs the brightest minds. And Mission Control is what it feels like to work with the Oxy, 1PointFive and Worley teams. You know it will be challenging to go fast and that you will face new curveballs â like a global pandemic or supply chain challenges â but you also know that itâs just engineering and chemistry, that the world is watching and counting on us, and that the teamâs will to overcome is quiet, steady and unwavering.âÂ
LORI GUETRE, VP AND HEAD OF BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT AT CARBON ENGINEERING
Construction was already well underway, with site preparation having kicked off in the third quarter of last year. 1PointFive expects this plant will be commercially operational in mid-2025.
Today, we invite you to step back into this moment and take in the event, remarks and experience for yourself. Watch the speaker remarks and 3D flythrough video below.
WATCH SPEAKER REMARKS
Michael Avery
Vicki Hollub
Richard Jackson
Lori Guetre
Chris Ashton
EXPLORE STRATOS
Flythrough the worldâs largest Direct Air Capture facility.
https://carbonengineering.com/news-updates/direct-air-capture-groundbreaking/
climate target- between 400m and 1.8 bn tonnes per year -??????? from the US Dept of Energy
By 2050 a $6 trillion market- who pays?
Increase the tax on carbon emissions? Who pays? New technology to reduce the price of carbon capture?
Perhaps the second best idea is to Paint it WHITE.
Perhaps a good time for a joke- There are 2 Spanish Firemen- the first one is called JosĂŠ. What is the name of the second?
The answer is Hose B (not Hose A!)
These two Ted Talks are about geoengineering. Geoengineering is a technique used to make the temperature of the earth decrease by sending particles into space to reflect some of the sunâs rays back into space.
Naomi Klein is against geoengineering. For her, the products used for geoengineering pollute the earth and that this is useless to solve pollution. Moreover, she said that the scientists who are behind this technique are not sure if this will work. On the other hand, Danny Hillis is for geoengineering. In his opinion, chalk can be used to do geoengineering.It is a safe product because we put it in baby food and because it will be dissolved in rainwater in a few years. He found out that it will be necessary to send 10 telegrams a year of chalk into space in order to undo the effects of the CO2 caused by humans which is equivalent to the debit of a hose pumping water.
We agree with Danny Hillis. We think that geoengineering can be a good idea and that it must be exploited in the future. But Naomi Klein also has good arguments, we are not sure it will be 100% safe, maybe it will have unknown side effects. So more research must be done in order to know if geoengineering can be a solution to reduce the temperature.
In both videos, the presenters are giving their opinions about geoengineering. They have divergent points of view. Geoengineering consists in reflecting some of the sunâs rays back to space by shooting particles in the atmosphere in order to cool the planet.
On the one hand, Naomi Klein is strongly against the use of this technology. According to her, the current projects are not reliable solutions to cope with global warming. Indeed, solving pollution issues with more pollution is not a solution. Moreover, scientists have no idea of the side effects that this technology could unleash, nevertheless geoengineering appears more often in the headlines as an escape hatch.
On the other hand, Danny Hillis tries to clear up some of the misunderstandings about geoengineering. He specifies geoengineering consists in creating artificial clouds, which we already do for instance with plane flights. The creation of these artificial clouds necessitates putting chalk up in the atmosphere. As stated by Danny Hillis, chalk is one of the most common minerals on earth in addition to being safe. Shooting 10 teragrams of chalk up in the atmosphere per year is all it requires to undo the effects CO2 has caused to the earth temperature.
In my opinion, geoengineering should be more explored because it could possibly be a solution to reduce the increasing temperature of the planet or at least be a time saver so more of the population can adapt their lifestyles to pollute less.