Comments on: Hansen’s “Two Plus Two Solution” to Global Warming http://climateprogress.org/2007/07/30/hansens-two-plus-two-solution-to-global-warming/ The Latest on Climate Science, Solutions, and Politics Wed, 20 Aug 2008 14:17:04 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.1 By: Earl Killian http://climateprogress.org/2007/07/30/hansens-two-plus-two-solution-to-global-warming/#comment-4867 Earl Killian Tue, 31 Jul 2007 02:36:00 +0000 http://climateprogress.org/2007/07/30/hansens-two-plus-two-solution-to-global-warming/#comment-4867 If anyone is concerned that Hansen's paragraph "Once the West stops..." is not enough leverage, consider that it will not only be negotiation that brings developing countries to kill their coal power plant plans and other planet killers, but also, I hope, US trade policy. Once the US taxes GHG emissions (or implements cap-and-auction, which amounts to the same thing), it will be politically necessary to put tariffs on imports from countries that are not part of the consensus (Europe is beginning to realize this now I think). With the world's most important market, the US is in a unique position to bring the rest of the world along with it. That is, assuming the US ever puts reality-based people in charge ("reality-based" as in Suskind's 2004.10.17 NYT magazine article, as opposed to the Bush's aide's description of their administration: "we create our own reality" -- the problem in a nutshell). Even better than burning biofuels and sequestering the CO2 would be to grow algae, but instead of making biodiesel, sequester the algal remains. Liquids or solids have higher density, and so make better use of underground storage capacity, and there isn't the chance for something like what happened at Lake Nyos in 1986. (The only downside: they'll probably turn into crude oil in time for the next species to reach industrial capacity after we're gone.) If we ever crank up an algae biodiesel industry, I could imagine eventually having the government buy a portion of the output to pump underground, just as today we buy crude for the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. If anyone is concerned that Hansen’s paragraph “Once the West stops…” is not enough leverage, consider that it will not only be negotiation that brings developing countries to kill their coal power plant plans and other planet killers, but also, I hope, US trade policy. Once the US taxes GHG emissions (or implements cap-and-auction, which amounts to the same thing), it will be politically necessary to put tariffs on imports from countries that are not part of the consensus (Europe is beginning to realize this now I think). With the world’s most important market, the US is in a unique position to bring the rest of the world along with it. That is, assuming the US ever puts reality-based people in charge (”reality-based” as in Suskind’s 2004.10.17 NYT magazine article, as opposed to the Bush’s aide’s description of their administration: “we create our own reality” — the problem in a nutshell).

Even better than burning biofuels and sequestering the CO2 would be to grow algae, but instead of making biodiesel, sequester the algal remains. Liquids or solids have higher density, and so make better use of underground storage capacity, and there isn’t the chance for something like what happened at Lake Nyos in 1986. (The only downside: they’ll probably turn into crude oil in time for the next species to reach industrial capacity after we’re gone.) If we ever crank up an algae biodiesel industry, I could imagine eventually having the government buy a portion of the output to pump underground, just as today we buy crude for the Strategic Petroleum Reserve.

]]> By: john http://climateprogress.org/2007/07/30/hansens-two-plus-two-solution-to-global-warming/#comment-4869 john Tue, 31 Jul 2007 12:31:49 +0000 http://climateprogress.org/2007/07/30/hansens-two-plus-two-solution-to-global-warming/#comment-4869 Two thoughts. With regard to Mr. Killian -- am I concerned that we won't have enough leverage? Well, I'm far more concerned that we'll forestall action while we seek to assure developed countries will act. Let's do what we need to do now -- then do whatever is necessary to get developed nations to act in the future, starting with the least draconian options. The one problem with Hansen's proposal centers on stopping non-carbon forcings. Good idea, but this one may have already gotten away from us. The plain fact is, warming may -- and perhaps has already started to -- trigger releases of natural methane from clathrates in amounts that dwarf direct anthropogenic releases of methane. I have infinite respect for Dr. Hansen, but I believe we have to take plausible worst case scenarios as our starting point. And volatilizing methane hydrates represent a very plausible possibility that argues for far more agressive action than we are contemplating. Dr. Hansen is right that we have to start to seriously figure out how to extract GHG from the atmosphere. But I'm afraid we're beyond treating that as a tweak. I believe it has to be a full court press, and that the structure of civilzation as we know it depends upon us starting now and getting it right. Doom and Gloom? Perhaps. Just as likely to be Reality. Two thoughts. With regard to Mr. Killian — am I concerned that we won’t have enough leverage? Well, I’m far more concerned that we’ll forestall action while we seek to assure developed countries will act. Let’s do what we need to do now — then do whatever is necessary to get developed nations to act in the future, starting with the least draconian options.

The one problem with Hansen’s proposal centers on stopping non-carbon forcings. Good idea, but this one may have already gotten away from us. The plain fact is, warming may — and perhaps has already started to — trigger releases of natural methane from clathrates in amounts that dwarf direct anthropogenic releases of methane.

I have infinite respect for Dr. Hansen, but I believe we have to take plausible worst case scenarios as our starting point. And volatilizing methane hydrates represent a very plausible possibility that argues for far more agressive action than we are contemplating.

Dr. Hansen is right that we have to start to seriously figure out how to extract GHG from the atmosphere. But I’m afraid we’re beyond treating that as a tweak. I believe it has to be a full court press, and that the structure of civilzation as we know it depends upon us starting now and getting it right. Doom and Gloom? Perhaps. Just as likely to be Reality.

]]>