Underestimation of Earth’s Warming Rate

James Hansen, a renowned climate scientist who first raised awareness of climate change dangers in Congress, recently published a contentious peer-reviewed paper in Oxford Open Climate Change. In the paper, Hansen argues that scientists are underestimating the Earth’s warming rate and highlights the need to explore geoengineering as a potential option to address the climate crisis. He emphasizes that current efforts in reducing greenhouse gas emissions may not be sufficient to prevent catastrophic global warming. As a result, implementing geoengineering, which involves large-scale manipulation of the Earth’s environment, could help mitigate the rising temperatures and negative impacts associated with climate change.

Hansen’s study suggests that the Earth will experience over 1.5°C of cumulative warming within this decade and is likely to exceed 2°C of warming by 2050. The Paris Climate Accord aims to keep warming below 1.5°C and well under 2°C. One factor that may cause underestimations of global warming is the lack of consideration for sulfur dioxide emissions produced by coal power plants and ships using bunker fuel. These sulfur dioxide emissions have a cooling effect on the planet by increasing the amount of sunlight reflected back into space, which counteracts some of the warming caused by greenhouse gases. As coal power plants are phased out and cleaner alternatives are implemented, this cooling effect will diminish, potentially leading to greater warming than predicted in current climate models.

The Double-Edged Sword of Reducing Sulfur Dioxide Emissions

Hansen admits that reducing sulfur dioxide emissions has reduced air pollution-related fatalities, but he points out that this comes at the cost of increased warming. He believes this leads to a higher occurrence of extreme weather incidents in the Northern Hemisphere. As a result of this increased warming, regions in the Northern Hemisphere may experience more frequent and severe heatwaves, storms, and other climate-related disasters. Consequently, these extreme weather events can have significant impacts on human health, agriculture, and infrastructure, potentially offsetting the benefits gained from decreased air pollution-related fatalities.

Critiquing Conventional Climate Policy

As an adjunct professor of earth and environmental sciences at Columbia University, Hansen frequently critiques conventional climate policy. He argues that simple emissions reduction will not guarantee a secure climate in the future. Instead, he suggests that governments implement carbon fees to accelerate emissions reduction and support research and deployment of methods to reduce incoming solar radiation through geoengineering. Hansen believes that by putting a price on carbon emissions, companies and individuals will be incentivized to adopt cleaner and more sustainable practices. Moreover, he emphasizes the importance of exploring innovative geoengineering solutions, such as solar radiation management, to supplement emission reduction efforts and increase the likelihood of maintaining a stable climate.

Debate Over Geoengineering Techniques

Geoengineering techniques, such as releasing sulfur dioxide into the stratosphere or spraying seawater into the air to produce clouds, are highly disputed. Numerous researchers warn against potential negative and unintended consequences of these methods. Despite the concerns, proponents of geoengineering argue that these approaches could be vital in mitigating the impacts of climate change, especially if current emission reduction efforts prove insufficient. They emphasize the need for continued research and development to better understand the risks and benefits associated with these techniques and to create effective implementation strategies.

Should We Fund Geoengineering Research?

The primary debate among climate scientists revolves around whether to fund research into geoengineering or whether it is too dangerous to even entertain. Few scientists declare that the deployment of geoengineering is essential. However, many acknowledge that investing in its research could lead to potential solutions that mitigate the devastating effects of climate change. Opponents argue that diverting resources towards geoengineering research could distract from the more pressing need to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and transition to renewable energy sources.

Recognizing Human Contribution to Geoengineering

Hansen underscores the need to recognize the ongoing human contribution to geoengineering due to greenhouse gases. He states, “We have to minimize that human-made geoengineering. By actively reducing our carbon footprint and implementing sustainable practices, we can mitigate the negative impacts of anthropogenic climate change. It is crucial for governments, businesses, and individuals to collaborate and prioritize effective solutions that ensure the protection of our environment and future generations.

Reflecting Sunlight as a Temporary Solution

And, on a temporary timescale, that will probably require reflecting sunlight, just because of how difficult it is to get the greenhouse gasses out of the atmosphere.” Thus, to combat the harmful effects caused by greenhouse gases, reflecting sunlight could act as an interim solution that helps in managing global temperatures. This approach may buy us much-needed time to devise and implement long-term strategies geared towards reducing and controlling greenhouse gas emissions effectively.

Frequently Asked Questions

What does James Hansen suggest in his recent paper?

James Hansen argues that scientists are underestimating the Earth’s warming rate and emphasizes the need to explore geoengineering as a potential option to address the climate crisis. He believes current efforts in reducing greenhouse gas emissions may not be sufficient to prevent catastrophic global warming.

Why might scientists be underestimating global warming?

One factor may be due to the lack of consideration for sulfur dioxide emissions produced by coal power plants and ships using bunker fuel. These emissions have a cooling effect on the planet, counteracting some of the warming caused by greenhouse gases. As coal power plants are phased out, this cooling effect will diminish, potentially leading to greater warming than predicted in current climate models.

What are some potential consequences of reducing sulfur dioxide emissions?

While reducing sulfur dioxide emissions has led to reduced air pollution-related fatalities, it also contributes to increased warming, potentially leading to a higher occurrence of extreme weather incidents in the Northern Hemisphere. This increased warming may result in more frequent and severe climate-related disasters that can impact human health, agriculture, and infrastructure.

What does Hansen propose as alternative solutions to address climate change?

Hansen suggests that governments implement carbon fees to accelerate emissions reduction and support research and deployment of methods to reduce incoming solar radiation through geoengineering. He believes that putting a price on carbon emissions will incentivize companies and individuals to adopt cleaner practices and emphasizes the importance of exploring innovative geoengineering solutions.

Why is the concept of geoengineering controversial?

Geoengineering techniques, such as releasing sulfur dioxide into the stratosphere or spraying seawater into the air to produce clouds, are highly disputed due to potential negative and unintended consequences. The primary debate among climate scientists is whether to fund research into geoengineering or consider it too dangerous to explore.

What is the role of human contribution in geoengineering?

Hansen emphasizes the need to minimize human-made geoengineering by actively reducing our carbon footprint and implementing sustainable practices. Governments, businesses, and individuals must collaborate and prioritize effective solutions to mitigate the negative impacts of anthropogenic climate change.

How can reflecting sunlight act as a temporary solution to climate change?

Reflecting sunlight could serve as an interim solution to manage global temperatures by counteracting the warming effects of greenhouse gases. This approach may provide time to devise and implement long-term strategies for reducing and controlling greenhouse gas emissions effectively.

First Reported on: time.com
Featured Image Credit: Photo by NASA; Unsplash; Thank you!