Climate geoengineering ideas fall into at least four principal categories:

    (1) increased reflectivity (albedo) of the atmosphere, injecting sulphur dioxide (suggested by Paul Crutzen, the Nobel Prize winner atmospheric chemist), or alumina particles, or even installing reflectors in space. The effects of sulphur injections would simulate volcanic events, such as of Pinatubo (1991) or Tambora (1816), which resulted in cooling of the Earth's surface by about 0.5 degrees. At best, albedo enhancement represents a short-term Band Aid solution to the fundamental greenhouse problem, and will not be able to prevent ocean acidification.

    (2) Increased sequestration of CO2 in the oceans, enhancing algal blooms and phytoplankton photosynthesis through fertilization with iron filings, or constructing vertical pipe systems designed to enhance oceanic circulation and CO2 intake from the atmosphere.

    (3) Biochar burial and soil enrichment. Combustion of plant waste under low oxygen conditions and burial as charcoal, removing carbon from atmospheric circulation and enhancing plant growth and photosynthesis, as well as soil enrichment. A major controversy erupted with objections to Biochar by George Monbiot, involving James Lovelock and James Hansen

    (4) Chemical sequestration involving combination of CO2 with sodium hydroxide (NaOH) installed in pipe systems ("Sodium trees"), followed by separation and burial of CO2, costing at about $300 a ton in US dollars. A back-of-an-envelope calculation suggests the reduction of atmospheric CO2 by 50 ppm would cost about $10 trillion to $15 trillion in US dollars, (although mass production may lessen the cost, as well as contribute to employment). That's less than 10 times the global military expenditure in 2007.

    Increasingly, a "technological fix" may look attractive to Obama and possibly the EU (and Rudd?), in view of at least three major obstacles to CPRS and ETS schemes:

First, due to the cumulative nature of atmospheric CO2, neither 5/15 percent nor 25/40 percent emission reduction by 2020 relative to 2000 would be able to prevent runaway climate change. This is because CO2 levels, now at 387 ppm and rising by 2 ppm/year, will exceed 400 ppm by 2020, well into the high danger zone. Assuming CO2 emissions are reduced by even 40 percent relative to 2000, it would keep rising by a minimum of 1.2 ppm/year, reaching levels near or above 450 ppm by 2050, and this is without even accounting for the effects of methane, likely reduced CO2 intake by the oceans and increase in positive feedbacks from the biosphere. At 450 ppm, with lag effects, polar ice sheets undergo advanced melting, with consequent major sea level rise. It is not clear how many of the submissions made to the Australian Senate Inquiry into the CPRS take account of this factor.

Second, it is a good question whether even such feeble CPRS attempts would not be squashed by the all-powerful fossil fuel lobby, currently supporting a massive, well-funded disinformation campaign, including claims as if the Earth is "cooling", accusing scientists and environmentalists of "environmental thuggery", including threats such as by Republican Rep. Michelle Bachmann ("I want people in Minnesota armed and dangerous on this issue of the energy tax because we need to fight back. Thomas Jefferson told us, 'Having a revolution every now and then is a good thing,' and the people - we the people - are going to have to fight back hard if we're not going to lose our country. And I think this has the potential of changing the dynamic of freedom forever in the United States." She added, "The science is on our side on this one".

Third, The preoccupation of suburbia international with economic issues. Until people fully understand the implications of runaway climate change, government actions are likely to be restricted within the context of the virtual reality of economic boom-bust bubbles, where greed and fear obscure the physical realities of the environment and of agricultural food production, a consequence of over 60 years of commercial propaganda rendering populations victims of ruthless vested interests at the expense of future generations.

    The Wilkins ice shelf collapse is but the latest symptom of fast-melting polar ice. Last year was the first during which the huge (13,680 square kilometers) shelf, which bridges the West Antarctic peninsula with the Charcot and Latady islands, developed fractures during mid-winter. Now advanced Synthetic Aperture Radar (ASAR) images acquired on April 2, 2009, by the European Earth Observation (ESA's) Envisat satellite confirm the ice shelf is collapsing into thousands of ice bergs, removing the barrier for the flow of continental glaciers into the ocean.

    Climate geoengineering is fiercely feared and resisted by many scientists and environmentalists, due to the collateral damage and side effects, and because it would take pressure off the carbon polluters. Moreover, that the powers-to-be reached an impasse with CPRS schemes suggests to many a moral bankruptcy of institutions and a failure of democracy. It is likely that only a combination of deep urgent cuts in carbon emissions, coupled with major investments in fast-tracked development of a wide range of effective carbon dioxide draw-down methods, may be capable of making the difference.

    --------

    Dr. Andrew Glikson is an Earth and paleoclimate scientist at the Australian National University, Canberra, Australia.

(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. h o t g l o b e has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is h o t g l o b e  endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)