Geoengineering Policies and Africa

1. Geoengineering Policies and Africa By David Stephen Writer/Researcher http://www.groundreport.com/stephen stephen@trpns.com May 2012

2. Synopsis • Geoengineering will be a tough sell to Africa, but this is not the headache. The risks accompanying the deployment of geoengineering as the last resort to solving global warming, is the sick headache of the subject. • Geoengineering (or Climate engineering) is considered as an alternative solution to global warming if the world cannot agree to curb green house emissions to a safe level.

3. Slides and Titles • 2 Synopsis • 4 Geoengineering • 6 Types of Geoengineering • 7 Solar Radiation Management • 8 Carbon Dioxide Removal • 9 Why Geoengineering is Considered • 14 Status of Geoengineering • 16 Issues with Geoengineering • 18 Geoengineering and Africa • 20 Policies that should attract Africa to geoengineering • 22 Summary • 23 Conclusion • 24 References

4. Geoengineering • Geoengineering can be described as a deliberate large-scale manipulation of the earth climate system to reduce or prevent excesses responsible for climate change. • Climate manipulation has been know about for centuries, but geoengineering (as an invention) surfaced more recently [1] and started making sense for large scale deployment, when ‘irreversible’ rise in the average temperature of the earth, according to projections, is near, and a global concerted effort to curb emissions may fall short.

5. Geoengineering is seen as a quick-fix solution, that will fractionally drop the average temperature of the earth, soon after deployment. This prediction and possibility, came in part, from the example of the Volcanic Eruption of Mount Pinatubo in the Philippines in 1991, that spilled aerosols into the atmosphere and dropped the earth’s average temperature by an average of 0.5oC over the next 18months. [2] • Spraying aerosols into the atmosphere, in line with this example, is one example, of the two major types of geoengineering.

6. Types of Geoengineering • Geoengineering is basically divided into two. The two are directed at excesses responsible for global warming. One, to reduce the amount of solar radiation reaching the earth or absorbed by the surface, and the other to reduce the amount of Carbon Dioxide in the atmosphere. • Solar Radiation Management (SRM) • Carbon Dioxide Removal (CDR)

7. Solar Radiation Management • Solar Radiation Management, or SRM, are artificial procedures directed at increasing the albedo of the earth’s atmosphere or surface, to reduce the amount of solar radiation reaching us or absorbed by the surface. Some of its procedures will be deployed from space and others, from the earth surface. [3] • Examples are spraying aerosols into the upper atmosphere, to reflect back incoming solar radiation; putting giant reflective mirrors in the atmosphere; cloud seeding to increase cloud albedo; and painting of roofs white (or roof-whitening), to reflect substantial amounts of solar rays back, immediately incident on them. [3]

8. Carbon Dioxide Removal • Carbon Dioxide Removal, or CDR, involves reducing the amount of CO2in the atmosphere. This can done by capturing and transporting CO2from industrial processes, and burying at geological formations below the ground or at sea depths.[4] It can also be done by ocean nourishment, afforestation and weathering of sedimentary rocks. [3] • CDR is seen as safe, sustainable and useful to removing potent CO2, responsible for global warming. But CDR worries remains its slow & protracted process, and diminutive removal of CO2 in the whole. [3]

9. Why Geoengineering is Considered • Geoengineering is an option and not the solution to global warming. It is basically considered and expected to be prepared, as insurance, to save the world from harmful climate change, if curbing Green House Gas (GHG) emissions is not globally backed on time or appropriately. • It can be used to save from effects of climate change if the earth gets to a point of irreversible climate change (or tipping point) i.e. when the average temperature is up enough to cause devastating effects. [3]

10. Geoengineering is expected to be deployed to reduce global warming if clearly necessary, but action on emission reduction is expected to be further pursued. Geoengineering does not replace curbing emissions, and is not researched to distract focus on action, but is seen as an application suitable for worst-case scenarios for earth’s climate change. • Proponents of geoengineering understand this, and are not forcing or imposing their solutions on the world, but with arguments and situations surrounding having a UN-proposed international climate change deal by nations, they believe geoengineering may come in at some point and are preparing it.

11. The United Nations through its annual climate change convention wants nations to enter into a binding agreement to cut and cap emissions. The last meeting in Durban puts 2015 as the year to ratify the agreement and 2020, to adopt. This ‘accord’ that came in the last minute, was seen as a success and is expected to involve all nations. [5] • Developing, developed, top-polluting nations and others are expected to have common but differentiated responsibilities, in line with the accord. This proposed deal however, has underlying arguments and the question of proper balance for all nations is still sought.

12. The world is still recovering from economic recession, with rife unemployment, foreclosures, austerity measures, soaring national debts, and possibilities of a double-dip within the walls. Recovery is expected for the rest of this decade, and world leaders are avoiding anything that will stymie it. • Economic growth, as long as most of our energy comes from fossil fuels will be generally linked to emissions growth.[6] This makes curbing emissions complicated, in reality, anytime soon. Renewable and sustainable energy that should replace fossil fuels still needs more years and investments, to increase their percentage use, globally.

13. Reaching a climate change deal and sticking to it may also face a hard-time in this changing world, with instability, unstable democracies, tensions, underdevelopment, pandemic, public pressure on the government, and uprising liable to happen from time to time. The level of distraction and attention for these, may excuse commitment, in sticking to the climate deal. • Geoengineering is considered, to be further researched, discussed and prepared, to be immediately available to save the world from irreversible climate change. Deploying geoengineering (if necessary) will only benefit the world, and not damage it, since it will be done within a safe range.

14. Status of Geoengineering • Geoengineering reports, studies and research grew through last decade and continues in this decade. [7] It further got momentum last September when UK Scientists announced a test titled, Stratospheric Particle Injection for Climate Engineering (SPICE),[8] to study aerosol-injection SRM geoengineering. • The test brought the reality of geoengineering close and was widely reported by the media. Though cancelled now, reports, meetings, writing-ups and discussions followed, on the test and generally. More are expected this year and beyond.

15. There are groups dedicated to geoengineering, examples are the Solar Radiation Management Governance Initiative and Task Force on Climate Remediation Research of the US Bipartisan Policy Center. There are savants who have taken up the geoengineering subject, in the scientific aspect or with policy respect. Geoengineering they know, have the potential but are courting more people to be involved in the conversation because of known & unknown issues with deployment, and more ideas needed to lit the path. • Geoengineering will be a band-aid for the earth climate system, but the subject faces several opposition because it is believed to be too risky and the question of a ‘neutral’ controller, before and after deployment are sought also.

16. Issues with Geoengineering • There are several issues with geoengineering, and some of those opposing it want the subject to be abandoned altogether than discussing it further as a potential solution. The issues are sizeable, but are scrap, if a climate change deal is not binding, and we start having an unfriendly planet. • Ability of using it as a weapon of war, unintended consequences after deployment, using it in a balanced way to avoid any region/nation feeling cheated, preventing unilateral use, further cooling and its risks if a similar natural process occur, are some of the issues.

17. Fears for geoengineering as a weapon of war or unilateral deployment should be low if the build up to deploying geoengineering is overt. With a treaty, or warning or consequence, nations will not go this direction because of repeated monitoring of global weather condition and how anomalies can be linked or traced. Using geoengineering in a war, could be a disruptive disadvantage to an offensive nation, because the delicate climate system may react badly, even on their side. This possibility will discourage wide acceptance. Geoengineering also is not as dangerous as nukes as some people have compared them in debates. • Geoengineering should be deployed within a safe range, so only positive results not consequences should follow.

18. Geoengineering and Africa • Africa has so far been mum on geoengineering, and support for the subject is not expected. Africa is strongly pushing that the world enters a legally binding agreement to have all nations curb emissions. Africa sees itself as disadvantaged in events of climate changethat it plays a little role causing. Africa has demands most of which were laid in Durban, and believe it should be met. Africa will sparingly, if ever, buy into geoengineering. Aside reasons that will originate from Africa, current opposition to geoengineering globally provides a stump for Africa to excoriate the subject.

19. Developed and top-polluting nations are seen by Africa as the enemy in climate change talks. These nations are trying to make the world understand reasons why a climate change deal cannot be sharply ratified and adopted, but raising and supporting geoengineering, might appear to Africa and others as the alternative pursued to avoid what is expected of them. • Africa, however, has pundits who understand geoengineering, and know that the subject is in a nest, and may never fly until we see what comes from the expected climate change deal between 2015-20, or events circa 2015-20 and changes in earth climate system that may demand its deployment.

20. Policies that should attract Africa to geoengineering • Africa’s involvement in the conversation should be participatory rather than talk/opinions. Participatory with research, with local reports & public engagement, with intertwining of selected climate change studies and geoengineering possibilities, with Africa’s weather condition, and with best & worst case scenarios. Geoengineering meetings are expected for the first time in Africa this year,[9] and it is expected to nudge Africa for active involvement. [10] Africa’s participation may initially be directed as to what to do and how to, to grow the interest of most for, than against.

21. Africa should also be involved with coordinating some of the developing world on geoengineering, with research, observations and knowledge distribution. Africa also, from some of its hopeful works, can increase believe in the positivity of geoengineering globally. • Africa lastly, should know the importance of understanding every bit of the subject, to submit the right arguments and also look for ways to collectively answer them. So that if the world suddenly needs to deploy geoengineering, Africans can be assured by Africans that it is coming for the necessity and will not harm.

22. Summary • Geoengineering is still a fetus, it will not bite and will not destroy the world. It is unlikely to be deployed anytime soon, providing enough time to prepare it. The developed world are still trying to understand and rightly incline the subject, scientifically and with governance and policy issues, [11] it is early enough for Africa to join. • No one is insisting that geoengineering is used, and preparing geoengineering through some of the ongoing steps does distract the world or prevent nations from reaching a legally binding climate change deal. Geoengineering will grow and Africa should engage now.

23. Conclusion • Geoengineering may never be deployed. This is the wish, as we expect the world to come off the climate change challenge through a deal that will reduce GHG emissions. • No one lives life unprepared for certain possibilities. This too goes for geoengineering in connection to climate change. If those involved in the conversation found Africa appropriate, this year, for meetings as part of untangling the multiplex geoengineering policy issue, it is with Africa to join in the growing conversation and get involved in every aspect.

24. References • Keith. D.W, (2000), GEOENGINEERING THE CLIMATE: History and Prospect. Department of Engineering and Public Policy, Carnegie Mellon University. Pages 5-15. http://keith.seas.harvard.edu/papers/26.Keith.2000.GeoengineeringHistoryandProspect.e.pdf • Lomborg. B, (2010), Geoengineering A Quick, Clean Fix? TIME Magazine Europe. http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,2030804,00.html • Bracmort. K, Lattanzio. R.K and Barbour. E.C, (2011), Geoengineering: Governance and Technology Policy. Congressional Research Service, Washington, DC. http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R41371.pdf

25. Kaldi. J, (2011), There’s more than one way to capture carbon. The Conversation, Australia. http://theconversation.edu.au/theres-more-than-one-way-to-capture-carbon-4483 • The Canada Press, (2011), Durban Climate Change Conference: Agreement Reached On Course For Future Accord. Huffington Post Canada. http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2011/12/11/agreement-reached-on-cour_n_1141691.html • Walsh. B, (2011), The Kyoto Accord – and Hopes – Are Expiring. TIME Magazine New York. http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,2098887,00.html

26. Olson. R.L, (2011), GEOENGINEERING FOR DECISION MAKERS. Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, Washington, DC. Figure 2, Page 6. http://www.wilsoncenter.org/sites/default/files/Geoengineering_for_Decision_Makers_0.pdf • Stratospheric Particle Injection for Climate Engineering, (SPICE) Information Page, September, 2011. http://www2.eng.cam.ac.uk/~hemh/SPICE/SPICE.htm

27. Tatalovic. M, (2012), Developing countries ‘need a say in geoengineering debates’. Science and Development Network. http://www.scidev.net/en/agriculture-and-environment/planet-under-pressure-2012-2/news/developing-countries-need-a-say-in-geoengineering-debates--1.html. • Stephen. D, (2012), Developing nations say in Geoengineering should come from a sense of involvement. Aid Netherland, Blog and News Agency. http://www.nl-aid.org/domain/environment/developing-nations-say-in-geoengineering-should-come-from-a-sense-of-involvement/

28. Long. J, and Rademaker. S, et al, (2011), Taskforce on Climate Remediation Report. Bipartisan Policy Center, Washington, DC. http://www.bipartisanpolicy.org/sites/default/files/BPC%20Climate%20Remediation%20Final%20Report.pdf

29. THANK YOU