Tag Archives: Thermos

These maps show what Americans think about climate change.

by Felipa6408 Posted on March 2, 2017

In some parts of the country, the season just breezed in three weeks ahead of schedule. Balmy weather may seem like more good news after an already unseasonably warm winter, but pause a beat before you reach for your flip-flops.

According to the “spring index,” a long-term data set which tracks the start of the season from year-to-year, spring is showing up earlier and earlier across the United States.

The culprit behind the trend? Climate change. And it’s bringing a batch of nasty consequences. Early warmth means early pests, like ticks and mosquitoes, and a longer, rougher allergy season. Agriculture and tourism can be thrown off, too. Washington D.C.’s cherry blossoms usually draw crowds in April, for instance, but they’re projected to peak three weeks early this year.

Spring isn’t shifting smoothly, either. It’s changing in fits and starts. Eggs are hatching and trees are losing their leaves, but temperatures could easily plunge again, with disastrous consequences for new baby animals and plants.

Play this out another 80 years, and it’s easy to imagine a world out of sync. Sure, your picnic in December sounds nice. But bees could lose their wildflowers, and groundhogs may never see their shadows again.

See the original post: 

These maps show what Americans think about climate change.

Posted in alo, Anchor, Everyone, FF, G & F, GE, LAI, ONA, oven, PUR, Ringer, Safer, Thermos, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on These maps show what Americans think about climate change.

13 Green Tips That Can Save You Over $5,000 A Year

by FrederiDarley Posted on August 8, 2016

Simple shifts to greener versions of the products you already buy can save you as much as $5,000 a year. Oh, and you’ll reduce the amount of energy you use and how much trash you throw away, too.  Here are 13 green tips I’ve made personally that have saved me a bundle of money while making me feel good about doing my part to protect the planet.

13 great green tips

Choose compact fluorescent light bulbs

Estimated Savings: $5 – $10/yr/bulb x 4 bulbs = $20 – $40/yr

CFLs use 66% less energy than a regular incandescent light bulb and last ten times as long. Plus, each bulb you shift to will save you $5 – $10 per year in electricity costs. That’s as much as $100 over the lifetime of every bulb you buy. Start by switching out bulbs in the four lights you use the most: your kitchen ceiling light, your bathroom ceiling light, two lamps in your living room or family room. Switch to LED lighting, and you’ll save even more on bulbs that last even longer than CFLs.

Try a reusable water bottle

Estimated Savings: $250 – $500/yr

Bottled water can cost 10,000 times more than tap water! Why? Because you’re paying for all kinds of things BESIDES water: the bottle, the water wasted during the bottling process, the energy used to bottle the water and transport the bottle to your store, the paper label on the bottle, and the bottle cap. Purchase a reusable water bottle for less than $20 and fill it up at home or at work. With these savings, you can buy a water filter for your tap if it makes you feel better, or buy a reusable bottle that comes with its own filter.

Take lunch to work

Estimated Savings: $1560/yr

This green tip is a big money saver, but you probably never thought it was a planet saver, too. Why is it so eco-friendly to take your own lunch to work? Because you’re not using all the throwaway plastic and paper packaging that a take-out lunch involves, especially if you use a reusable lunch bag and food containers.

Programmable thermostat. Image courtesy of _vikram

Program your thermostat

Estimated Savings: $150/yr

Every time you adjust the thermostat to reduce your heating or cooling needs, you save money. But remembering to make the adjustment can be a challenge. The beauty of a programmable thermostat is that it does the adjusting for you. Set the controls to moderate temperatures, and enjoy watching your energy bills decrease.

Put in low flow shower heads, toilets

Estimated Savings: $72/yr

Most conventional shower heads and toilets use an excessive amount of water, wasting a precious resource along with your hard-earned dollars. Replace your existing shower head with a high-impact low flow model to enjoy the same quality but using far less water. Older model toilets may use as much as six gallons of water per flush; newer models only need 1.6 gallons (or less) to get the job done.

Plug in to a smart power strip

Estimated Savings: $94/yr

Computers, fax machines, monitors, answering machines, televisions and other electronics are called “vampires” because they keep sucking energy out of the electrical sockets they’re plugged in to even when they’re turned off. In fact, according to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, electric appliances use 40% of their energy when they’re turned off! You can cut that – and your energy bill – simply by plugging your electronics into an energy-saving power strip.

Insulate windows, doors with weather stripping

Estimated Savings: $129/yr

A lot of energy is wasted in winter and summer alike when cooled or heated air escapes through cracks around windows and doors. Caulking windows and weather-stripping doors reduces the losses to everything but your pocketbook.

Improve car fuel economy

Estimated Savings: $1050/yr

With gas prices averaging around $2.50 a gallon, every gallon of gas you save puts real money back in your wallet. Burning less gas generates a lot less smog and air pollution, and reduces the impact driving has on climate change, too. If you replace a car that gets only 20 mpg with one that gets 40 mpg, you’ll save $750/yr at today’s gas prices. When prices rise, a fuel efficient car saves you even more. Learn to drive “smart.” Following the speed limit, driving at a consistent speed, keeping the engine tuned up and your tires inflated, will save an additional $300- $500/yr.

Skip one driving trip each week

Estimated Savings: $225/yr

Gasoline costs for individual trips can really add up. Replace at least one trip a week with a carpool, or shop online, telecommute, bicycle or walk to save fuel and money. You can find many more ways to cut your fuel costs at www.biggreenpurse.com.

Energy Star Energy Guide. Image courtesy of Andy Melton.

Buy ENERGY STAR appliances

Estimated Savings: $100/yr on energy, 7,000+ gallons of water

All ENERGY STAR appliances are designed to save energy, and clothes washers and dishwashers offer the added benefit of saving thousands of gallons of water over conventional models. Plus, many local utilities offer a $50 or $100 rebate when consumers trade in old refrigerators and air conditioners for new ENERGY STAR models.

Make Home Cleansers

Estimated Savings: $360/yr

You can save a small fortune by skipping commercial cleaning products and using simple and non-toxic ingredients you probably already have in your kitchen. You can clean almost any surface in your home with fragrance-free and biodegradable liquid soap, standard baking soda, hot water, and a sponge. For windows, mirrors and other glass surfaces, use a mixture of vinegar and water, and you’ll pay mere pennies per window to get the shine you want. You can find many green cleaning recipes here.

Buy Gently Used, Swap, or Get Free

Estimated Savings: $750/yr

Swap or trade what you already have for what you want. Use our recycling locator find recycling opportunities, or check listings at Craigslist.com, freecycle.org or your own neighborhood list-serv.

Sell Your Own Used Stuff

Estimated Savings: $350/yr

We all have more stuff than we can use. And we all throw away perfectly good items that someone else could use. From clothing and sports equipment to kitchenware, electronics and furniture, our trash can also generate some treasure. Take advantage of listservs, Ebay and Craigslist to sell what you no longer need or use. And don’t forget that tried-and-true method of keeping your perfectly good stuff in circulation: the neighborhood yard sale!

Total Estimated Savings: $5,110.00

What green shifts have you made that have saved you money? Do you have other green tips you’d like to share with others? Leave your comments below.

Featured image courtesy of Ken Neoh

About
Latest Posts

Diane MacEachern

Diane MacEachern is a best-selling author, award-winning entrepreneur and mother of two with a Master of Science degree in Natural Resources and the Environment. Glamour magazine calls her an “eco hero” and she recently won the “Image of the Future Prize” from the World Communications Forum, but she’d rather tell you about the passive solar house she helped design and build way back when most people thought “green” was the color a building was painted, not how it was built. She founded biggreenpurse.com because she’s passionate about inspiring consumers to shift their spending to greener products and services to protect themselves and their families while using their marketplace clout to get companies to clean up their act.

Latest posts by Diane MacEachern (see all)

13 Green Tips That Can Save You Over $5,000 A Year – August 8, 2016
Valentines Day Gifts That Show Mother Earth Some Love, Too – February 4, 2015
Tired Of Spending Your Money On Gas? Get A Chevy Volt – January 28, 2015

Connect with us:

Sign Up for Our Newsletter

Sign up for our newsletter for exclusive updates on contests, new products, and more.

Recent Posts

Rio2016™ Goes For Gold In Sustainability
13 Green Tips That Can Save You Over $5,000 A Year
Why House Hunting By Bike Has Real Curb Appeal
Seabin Project Aims To Reduce Ocean Pollution
How To Secure Your Tiny Home
Create Your Own Zero Waste Starter Kit
Are Electric Toothbrushes And Razors Recyclable?
The Green Dog Owners Guide
Solar Powered Airplane ‘Explores The Impossible’
9 Reasons Why We Love Natural Men’s Skincare
Urban Gardening: Micro Food Producers
Are Auto Tires Headed In The Right Direction?

Read

Connect With Us

Facebook
Twitter
YouTube
Pinterest
Google Plus

Advertise With Us

Copyright ©. 2016 Earth911. All Rights Reserved.

Sign Up for Our Newsletter

Sign up for our newsletter for exclusive updates on contests, new products, and more.

earth911

Original link: 

13 Green Tips That Can Save You Over $5,000 A Year

Posted in alo, eco-friendly, FF, GE, LG, ONA, PUR, solar, solar power, Thermos, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on 13 Green Tips That Can Save You Over $5,000 A Year

That massive methane leak in L.A. was visible from space

by JulianeBurchfie Posted on June 16, 2016

emission control

That massive methane leak in L.A. was visible from space

By on Jun 16, 2016Share

The massive methane leak in California’s Alisio Canyon may have been invisible to the human eye, but it wasn’t invisible to NASA.

The leak, which spewed an estimated 97,100 metric tons of the greenhouse gas into the atmosphere, led to the evacuation of thousands of residents, and took nearly 4 months to stop. Now, NASA has released infrared images of the methane plume, as captured by satellites. This is the first time a methane leak has been observable from space, the Washington Post reports.

Two images methane plumes over Aliso Canyon, California, acquired 11 days apart in Jan. 2016.NASA-JPL/Caltech/GSFC

Methane is an especially potent greenhouse gas, 84 times more powerful than carbon dioxide (though it doesn’t hang around in the atmosphere quite as long). The ability to observe it from space could be a powerful tool in tracking global emissions targets set at the 2015 Paris climate accord, according to the Post.

As for the Alisio Canyon leak, the natural gas facility has been shut down since February, prompting concerns about power outages for the region. The California Public Utilities Commission is currently looking at solutions, including voluntary air conditioning interruptions, rebates for smart thermostats, and expanded solar initiatives.

But the damage has been done: In the months before the Alisio Canyon leak was stopped, it released the equivalent annual greenhouse gas emissions of 572,000 cars.

Find this article interesting?

Donate now to support our work.

Get Grist in your inbox

Source:

That massive methane leak in L.A. was visible from space

Posted in alo, Anchor, Brita, Everyone, FF, GE, LAI, ONA, solar, solar panels, Thermos, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on That massive methane leak in L.A. was visible from space

5 Energy-Saving Gifts Any Home Can Use

by SophiaCable Posted on December 14, 2015

Are you running out of gift ideas? Here are five possibilities that are popular because they save money, help reduce climate change and are just unusual enough that someone probably wouldn’t by them for him or herself.

1) Nest Thermostat – The Nest Thermostat takes programmable thermostats to a whole new level. Its auto-schedule feature enables it to learn what temperatures you like throughout the day, and then program itself to automatically operate at those temps. The device will automatically turn itself down when nobody’s home to help you save energy. You can connect to your WiFi and control the temperature in your home from your phone, tablet or laptop. And to give you an incentive to save energy, a cute little green leaf will show up on the front of the thermostat when you choose an energy-saving temperature. Though the Nest costs about $250, it could save you 10-12 percent a year on your heating bills and as much as 15 percent on your cooling bills, so it will pay for itself in just a couple of year. The device works with 95 percent of 24V heating and cooling systems, including gas, electric, forced air, heat pump, radiant, oil, hot water, solar and geothermal. You can buy it online at Nest.com or at Home Depot.

2) LED bulb – LED bulbs are starting to catch on, but because they’re somewhat more expensive and sometimes look a little unusual, some consumers have been dragging their heels about buying them. I always give LED bulbs to people as housewarming gifts, but they make good holiday gifts, as well. They are more durable than compact fluorescent bulbs, so can withstand significant temperature fluctuations (CFLs can be very slow to turn on and illuminate in cold weather). Unlike regular incandescents, they don’t generate mostly heat. An LED is all about light, and a lot of it. The key is to get an LED that meets ENERGY STAR’s certifications for light quality and performance. You can get more information about LED bulbs on the ENERGY STAR website. Once installed, you may not have to change an LED bulb for a good 10 years or so. That in itself is a gift worth giving!

3) The Wonderbag – Wonderbag is a non-electric, portable slow cooker. It almost looks like a medium sized pouffy pillow that your cat might sit on. But in fact, it’s made up nifty insulated blocks wrapped in colorful fabric that, by some genius means, can effectively cook food that’s placed inside the bag. All you have to do is bring food to a boil, then take it off your stove, and put a lid on it. Wonderbag will do all the rest. I’ve used mine to make yogurt in; instead of keeping my oven on warm while my yogurt firms up, I put that hot bowl of yogurt mix, covered, into the Wonderbag and tie it close. Six or so hours later, I’ve got delicious yogurt. BONUS: For every Wonderbag purchased in North America, one is donated to a family in Africa. This low-tech cooking technology is being hailed as an affordable solution to climate change because it can help families stop burning coal and wood when they cook. Can’t figure out how it works? These videos explain.

4) Heated shawl or heated lap blanket – Do you hate to shiver when you’re working, reading, knitting or watching TV? But hate more turning up the heat for the whole house just so you won’t freeze in your chair? An electric shawl or lap blanket could be the perfect gift either for yourself or for family or friends. You can adjust the temperature to be warm or hot, and if you go with a shawl design, you’ll be able to use your hands to read, sew, knit, work on your computer, or do other tasks. Search online for “heated shawl.” You’ll find several options to choose from if you search “heated shawl or lap blanket” online.

5) Solar chargers to recharge phones, tablets, possibly laptops – Who could use a solar charger? Someone who goes hiking and camping and needs to keep his devices powered up. Someone who lives in an area that is prone to power outages. Someone who is traveling and can’t rely on having an electrical outlet and the right amount of power available. Or just anyone who’d like to cut their carbon footprint a little bit by recharging via the sun rather than a coal-fired plug. You can find solar chargers online, but also at stores as diverse as REI, Land’s End, Home Depot and Best Buy. Before you buy, you might want to read this review in the Wirecutter. They researched 69 solar chargers and spent 22 hours testing eight of them in the desert. They recommend the RAVPower 15W Solar Charger, which costs $50, saying it can charge most phones at near full speed and an iPad Air2 in roughly five hours of clear sunlight.

Related
Tips and Tricks to Avoid Overspending This Holiday
5 Ways to Help Others on Christmas Day

Disclaimer: The views expressed above are solely those of the author and may not reflect those of Care2, Inc., its employees or advertisers.

Follow this link:  

5 Energy-Saving Gifts Any Home Can Use

Posted in alo, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, oven, Pines, PUR, Radius, solar, Sprout, Thermos, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on 5 Energy-Saving Gifts Any Home Can Use

What Are the Latest Green Living Trends?

by EverettButtensha Posted on October 29, 2015

earth911

Follow this link:

What Are the Latest Green Living Trends?

Posted in eco-friendly, FF, GE, Thermos, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on What Are the Latest Green Living Trends?

Shivering at Work? Could Be Sexism.

by ChunYpaqsdyoyze Posted on August 7, 2015

FEATURED NONPROFIT PARTNERS

Copyright © 2015 Care2.com, inc. and its licensors. All rights reserved

logoff
my account
my care2

site feedback

ONSITE FEEDBACK FORM

Problem on this page? Briefly let us know what isn’t working for you and we’ll try to make it right!

Read more:

Shivering at Work? Could Be Sexism.

Posted in alo, Everyone, FF, GE, LG, ONA, Thermos, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Shivering at Work? Could Be Sexism.

Who’s going to pay these companies to suck CO2 out of the air?

by DonteKirkwood Posted on July 15, 2015

Who’s going to pay these companies to suck CO2 out of the air?

By on 15 Jul 2015commentsShare

So let’s say we massively botch this save-humanity-from-imminent-doom thing and end up  on an irreversible path toward a planet that warms by more than 2 degrees Celsius (that terrifying point beyond which we all spontaneously combust, or something). Hell, maybe we’re already on that path. Or maybe 2 degrees is actually too high to be safe. Or maybe this is all just too depressing to think about. Regardless, wouldn’t it be nice to have some way to just reach up and grab some of that CO2 right out of the atmosphere — just to be safe?

That’s the motivation behind a growing number of startups working on direct carbon capture and sequestration technology, but according to The Guardian, these companies aren’t getting much love from government officials:

Carbon Engineering, Global Thermostat and Climeworks all sprung up during the mid-to-late-2000s, when it looked as if the world’s governments might take aggressive action to curb climate change. Mostly, they haven’t. Since then, the three startups have been refining their technology, raising capital and very gradually bringing CO2 capture closer to a commercial reality. …

But until governments are willing to pay for carbon removal and storage, the three air-capture startups will need commercial customers that can keep them afloat in case they are needed, potentially decades from now, as a climate solution. All are aiming to make low-carbon fuels, using recycled CO2 and renewable energy to power the process.

With government funding, the scientists behind these technologies could, in theory, just start burying CO2 in the oceans or underground (after making sure it’s safe to do so, of course). But right now they have to rely on the free market, for better or worse:

The open question for all three startups is whether any can raise enough money – and sustain enough cashflow – in the short term for their efforts to matter in the long term.

The CEO of Warner Music has been Global Thermostat’s biggest bankroller so far, The Guardian reports, but the company is about to announce a multimillion dollar investment from a U.S. energy company. Carbon Engineering, led by Harvard geoengineering researcher David Keith, has so far received funding from Bill Gates, and Climeworks has done some early work with Audi on a “zero-carbon e-diesel.”

But what if that cashflow runs dry? The U.S. government acknowledged in February that direct air capture and sequestration is worth investigating, so maybe they should just pony up the cash. Sure, funding the science of the future has never been easy (except maybe for Elon Musk), but this never-ending struggle between what works in the short term and what’s best in the long term is getting old.

Source:
Startups have figured out how to remove carbon from the air. Will anyone pay them to do it?

, The Guardian.

Share

Please

enable JavaScript

to view the comments.

Find this article interesting?

Donate now to support our work. A Grist Special Series

Meat: What’s smart, what’s right, what’s next

Get Grist in your inbox

Visit site: 

Who’s going to pay these companies to suck CO2 out of the air?

Posted in alo, Anchor, eco-friendly, FF, G & F, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, organic, Radius, Thermos, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Who’s going to pay these companies to suck CO2 out of the air?

How a Massive Environmental Crisis Led to the Invention of Cheese

by HassanNoriega Posted on April 16, 2015

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

A version of this article was originally published on Gastropod.

This is the story you’ll often hear about how humans discovered cheese: One hot day 9,000 years ago, a nomad was on his travels and brought along some milk in an animal stomach—a sort of proto-thermos—to have something to drink at the end of the day. But when he arrived, he discovered that the rennet in the stomach lining had curdled the milk, creating the first cheese.

But there’s a major problem with that story, as University of Vermont cheese scientist and historian Paul Kindstedt explained on the latest episode of Gastropod—a podcast that explores food through the lens of science and history. The nomads living in the Fertile Crescent of the Middle East in 7000 B.C. would have been lactose-intolerant. A nomad on the road wouldn’t have wanted to drink milk; it would have left him in severe gastro-intestinal distress.

Kindstedt, author of the book Cheese and Culture, explained that about a thousand years before traces of cheese-making show up in the archaeological record, humans began growing crops. Those early fields of wheat and other grains attracted local wild sheep and goats, which provide milk for their young. Human babies are also perfectly adapted for milk. Early humans quickly made the connection and began dairying—but for the first thousand years, toddlers and babies were the only ones consuming the milk. Human adults were uniformly lactose-intolerant, says Kindstedt. What’s more, he told us that “we know from some exciting archaeo-genetic and genomic modeling that the capacity to tolerate lactose into adulthood didn’t develop until about 5500 B.C.”—which is at least a thousand years after the development of cheese.

It took another recent advance to figure out the origins of cheese: Kindstedt says that only recently have scientists been able to analyze the chemical traces on pottery from thousands of years ago in order to find milk fat in the higher concentrations that indicate it was used to hold cheese or butter, rather than plain milk.

Using this new research, Kinstead explains, we now know that the real dawn of cheese came about 8,500 years ago, with two simultaneous developments in human history. First, by then, over-intensive agricultural practices had depleted the soil, leading to the first human-created environmental disaster. As a result, Neolithic humans began herding goats and sheep more intensely, as those animals could survive on marginal lands unfit for crops. And secondly, humans invented pottery: the original practical milk-collection containers.

In the warm environment of the Fertile Crescent region, Kinstedt explained, any milk not used immediately and instead left to stand in those newly invented containers “would have very quickly, in a matter of hours, coagulated due to the heat and the natural lactic acid bacteria in the milk. And at some point, probably some adventurous adult tried some of the solid material and found that they could tolerate it a lot more of it than they could milk.” That’s because about 80 percent of the lactose drains off with the whey, leaving a digestible and, likely, rather delicious fresh cheese.

With the discovery of cheese, suddenly those early humans could add dairy to their diets. Cheese made an entirely new source of nutrients and calories available for adults, and, as a result, dairying took off in a major way. What this meant, says Kindstedt, is that “children and newborns would be exposed to milk frequently, which ultimately through random mutations selected for children who could tolerate lactose later into adulthood.”

In a very short time, at least in terms of human evolution—perhaps only a few thousand years—that mutation spread throughout the population of the Fertile Crescent. As those herders migrated to Europe and beyond, they carried this genetic mutation with them. According to Kindstedt, “It’s an absolutely stunning example of a genetic selection occurring in an unbelievably short period of time in human development. It’s really a wonder of the world, and it changed Western civilization forever.”

To learn more about what those first cheeses tasted like—and how we got from there to Velveeta—listen to Gastropod’s “Say Cheese!” episode:

Gastropod is a podcast about the science and history of food. Each episode looks at the hidden history and surprising science behind a different food and/or farming-related topic—from aquaculture to ancient feasts, from cutlery to chili peppers, and from microbes to Malbec. It’s hosted by Cynthia Graber, an award-winning science reporter, and Nicola Twilley, author of the popular blog Edible Geography. You can subscribe via iTunes, email, Stitcher, or RSS for a new episode every two weeks.

Originally posted here: 

How a Massive Environmental Crisis Led to the Invention of Cheese

Posted in alo, Anchor, aquaculture, ATTRA, FF, G & F, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Radius, Thermos, Ultima, Uncategorized, Venta, Vintage | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on How a Massive Environmental Crisis Led to the Invention of Cheese

We Could Stop Global Warming With This Fix—But It’s Probably a Terrible Idea

by LorrieDarley Posted on March 27, 2015

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>
Mount Pinatubo erupting in 1991 Bullit Marquez/AP

Back in the late 1990s, Ken Caldeira set out to disprove the “ludicrous” idea that we could reverse global warming by filling the sky with chemicals that would partially block the sun. A few years earlier, Mount Pinatubo had erupted in the Philippines, sending tiny sulfate particles—known as aerosols—into the stratosphere, where they reflected sunlight back into space and temporarily cooled the planet. Some scientists believed that an artificial version of this process could be used to cancel out the warming effect of greenhouse gases.

“Our original goal was to show that it was a crazy idea and wouldn’t work,” says Caldeira, who at the time was a climate scientist at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. But when Caldeira and a colleague ran a model to test out this geoengineering scenario, they were shocked by what they found. “Much to our surprise, it worked really well,” he recalls. “Our results indicate that geoengineering schemes could markedly diminish regional and seasonal climate change from increased atmospheric CO2,” they wrote in a 2000 paper.

You might think that the volume of aerosols needed to increase the Earth’s reflectivity (known as albedo) enough to halt global climate change would be enormous. But speaking to Kishore Hari on this week’s Inquiring Minds podcast, Caldeira explains that “if you had just one firehose-worth of material constantly spraying into the stratosphere, that would be enough to offset all of the global warming anticipated for the rest of this century.”

So does Caldeira think it’s time to start blasting aerosols into the air? Nope. “It’s a funny situation that I feel like I’m in,” he says. “Most of our published results show that it would actually work quite well, but personally I think it would be a crazy thing to do.” He thinks there’s just too much risk.

Caldeira, now a climate scientist at the Carnegie Institution for Science, recently contributed to a massive National Academy of Sciences report examining various geoengineering proposals. The report concluded that technologies to block solar radiation “should not be deployed at this time” and warned that “there is significant potential for unanticipated, unmanageable, and regrettable consequences in multiple human dimensions…including political, social, legal, economic, and ethical dimensions.” As my colleague Tim McDonnell explained back when the NAS study was released:

Albedo modification would use airplanes or rockets to deliver loads of sulfate aerosols into the stratosphere, where they would bounce sunlight back into space. But if the technology is straightforward, the consequences are anything but.

The aerosols fall out of the air after a matter of years, so they would need to be continually replaced. And if we continued to burn fossil fuels, ever more aerosols would be needed to offset the warming from the additional CO2. University of California, San Diego, scientist Lynn Russell said that artificially blocking sunlight would have unknown consequences for photosynthesis by plants and phytoplankton, and that high concentrations of sulfate aerosols could produce acid rain. Moreover, if we one day suddenly ceased an albedo modification program, it could cause rapid global warming as the climate adjusts to all the built-up CO2. For these reasons, the report warns that it would be “irrational and irresponsible to implement sustained albedo modification without also pursuing emissions mitigation, carbon dioxide removal, or both.”

Still, the NAS report called for further research into albedo modification, just in case we one day reach a point where we seriously consider it.

Caldeira hopes it never comes to that. Like most other advocates of geoengineering research, he’d much rather stave off global warming by drastically cutting carbon emissions. In fact, he calls for a target of zero emissions. But he doesn’t have much faith in politicians or in legislative fixes like carbon taxes or cap and trade. “The only way it’s really going to happen,” he says, “is if there’s a change in the social norms.” Caldeira envisions a world in which it’s socially unacceptable for power companies to “use the sky as a waste dump.”

And if that doesn’t work out?

Caldeira points out that if we keep emitting huge amounts of CO2, temperatures are going to keep rising. That could lead to increased crop failures and possibly even “widespread famines with millions of people dying.” In that type of hypothetical crisis, he says, “there’s really only one way known to cool the planet on a politically relevant timescale”—aerosols. “So I think it’s worth understanding it now,” he adds. “At some point in the future it could make sense to do. I hope we don’t get to that state, but it’s possible.”

To hear the full interview with Ken Caldeira, stream below:

Inquiring Minds is a podcast hosted by neuroscientist and musician Indre Viskontas and Kishore Hari, the director of the Bay Area Science Festival. To catch future shows right when they are released, subscribe to Inquiring Minds via iTunes or RSS. You can follow the show on Twitter at @inquiringshow and like us on Facebook.

See the original article here:  

We Could Stop Global Warming With This Fix—But It’s Probably a Terrible Idea

Posted in Anchor, FF, G & F, GE, global climate change, LAI, LG, ONA, organic, Pines, PUR, Radius, solar, Thermos, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on We Could Stop Global Warming With This Fix—But It’s Probably a Terrible Idea

Some Climate Engineering Ideas Are Insane. This One Isn’t.

by EusebiaBailey Posted on February 26, 2015

Mother Jones

This story originally appeared on the Slate website and is reproduced here apart of the Climate Desk collaboration.

According to technological optimists, in the next two or three decades, humanity will embark on a new era of possibility. Super-smart computers and other advances may even make certain types of less risky, large-scale climate actions a reality. Open any number of sci-fi books from the last few decades and you have an idea of how nanotechnology could make planetary-scale engineering possible. (Kim Stanley Robinson’s work comes immediately to mind.) Maybe swarms of self-replicating photosynthetic nanobots will be able to quickly and cheaply suck CO2 from the air? What about coating all the world’s rooftops in organic solar panels? Or optimizing biofuel production from algae on the molecular scale? The possibilities are mind-boggling.

Earlier this month, delegates from virtually every country on Earth gathered in Geneva to produce the initial draft of a global climate agreement to be signed in Paris later this year. In it were several references to net zero or negative emissions after 2050.

On our current path, humanity is still tracking at (or even slightly above) the worst-case climate scenario laid out about a decade ago. The latest comprehensive update from the world’s climate scientists outlined a best-case scenario that is now likely to require a ramp-up of carbon capture-and-storage to meet emissions targets. If it works, sucking excess carbon dioxide from the air could result in net negative global carbon emissions by the end of the century, and likely provide our best hope for returning concentrations to pre-industrial levels in our lifetimes. If it works.

We’re still far, far from that trajectory—emissions continue to increase each year at the global level. We’ve waited so long to address escalating carbon emissions that we must honestly consider research into these technologies. And, let’s face it, trying to shift humanity off fossil fuels any time soon feels increasingly like a lost cause.

Continue Reading »

Taken from:

Some Climate Engineering Ideas Are Insane. This One Isn’t.

Posted in Anchor, FF, G & F, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, organic, Radius, solar, solar panels, solar power, Thermos, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Some Climate Engineering Ideas Are Insane. This One Isn’t.