Here is a chart of multiple Geo-engineering projects that have been suggested.
Project
|
What’s to be done?
|
Why do it?
|
Which areas would it help
|
How much will it actually help?
|
What are potential risks?
|
Cost?
|
Is it worth pursuing…
|
White roofs
|
All houses have their roofs either painted white or built so they are
white.
|
To create more reflective surfaces to reflect sunlight back into
space.
|
globally
|
Not much
|
There aren’t any high risks
|
Relatively cheap
|
No- because recent studies show that it could actually end up warming
the earth by black carbon in the atmosphere taking in the light.
|
Copycat volcanoes
|
Attach a garden hose to a helium balloon to pump sulfur into the
atmosphere
|
Sulfur dioxide blocks sunlight
|
globally
|
Not sure
|
-It could have dangerous unintended environmental changes like
weather change
- cause ozone depletion
|
$8-10 billion per year
|
No – more experiments should be done to see side effects of the
project. Also we don’t have the technology to do this yet.
|
High flying airplanes
|
Use high flying airplanes to constantly refill a layer of particles
in the stratosphere
|
It would deflect away about 2% of sunlight and its actually beneficial
to crops
|
globally
|
It would be pretty effective
|
Same as copycat volcano
|
~$8 billion per year
|
Side effects still need to be further evaluated and we don’t have the
technology.
|
Sun Shield
|
Launch trillions of small mirrors into space to form a large mirror
between the sun and earth
|
Reduce sunlight by 2%
|
globally
|
Very effective
|
Don’t see any large risks but is untested so there still could potentially be risks.
|
about $4 trillion
|
No- don’t have the technology yet the mirrors are too heavy to be
launched into space and it’s also very expensive
|
More clouds
|
Use specially made ships to sending sea water into the sky
|
Increase the reflective power of the clouds by 3%
|
globally
|
Pretty effective
|
It’s still untested so risks are hard to determine
|
$7 billion
|
No- more testing and experimenting need to be done
|
Fake trees
|
Towers that suck CO2 from the
air and store it underground
|
Take in about 1 ton of CO2 each day
|
globally
|
Effective
|
Being tested right now – doesn’t seem to have any large risks
|
$150 per ton
|
Maybe after more testing
|
made by me
|
Really cool chart! I assume this is your independent figure, great job! It is a bit too large for the area so I would try and edit it so that it fits the area, or enlarge your blog page so that it covers the entire table!
ReplyDelete-Megan Walter
Nice chart, perhaps it could use a resizing to make it look a little more aesthetically pleasing. Also I'm going to assume that this is your synthesized figure so I think it might be a good idea to list all your areas of reference beneath the chart or maybe put a number next to the data that corresponds to your reference page. This might be overkill I guess since the reference tab may suffice
ReplyDelete-Jeff Belle
Definitely need to resize this. I can't read most of it on my little laptop screen. If you don't know any other way to resize, I think if you go to "layout" there is link at the top for "template designer." I'm pretty sure you can change the width there.
ReplyDeleteKristine Patterson