Tag Archives: geoengineering

how bad would a “small” nuclear war between India and Pakistan be?

Leave a reply

It would be really, really, really, really really bad, and not just for the region but for the whole world.

Simply put, soot would block about 20% to 30% of the Sun’s light, globally. That’s a decrease of about 30W to 60W per square meter of the Earth’s surface. For comparison, the 1991 eruption of Mount Pinatubo caused a decrease of 4W per square meter. The result would be a 2°C to 5°C (about 4°F to 9°F) global cooling. Temperatures would reach their lowest after about three years and maintain that level for another four years. Getting back to previous temperatures would take over a decade.

The cooling would slow the hydrologic cycle and decrease rainfall by 15% to 30% percent globally, with impacts varying in different regions. In India and Central China, for example, precipitation would drop to nearly zero. The Northeastern and Midwestern United States would see a decline of 50%.

The temperature, precipitation, and sunlight change would obviously impact photosynthesis on land and in the ocean. The model estimated a 15% to 30% drop in growth on land—known as Net Primary Productivity—and a 5% to 15% drop in the ocean.

If global warming gets really bad, maybe we can just blow up a nuke or two on some out of the way continent. Antarctica won’t work because there isn’t much combustible material there. So no, never mind, I never said that.

March 2019 in Review

Leave a reply

Most frightening and/or depressing story:

Most hopeful story:

  • The Green New Deal, if fleshed out into a serious plan, has potential to slow or reverse the decline of the United States.

Most interesting story, that was not particularly frightening or hopeful, or perhaps was a mixture of both:

  • China is looking into space-based solar arrays. Also, injecting sulfate dust into the atmosphere could actually boost rice yields because rice is more sensitive to temperature than light, at least within the ranges studied. This all suggests that solutions to climate change that do not necessarily involve an end to fossil fuel burning and carbon emissions are possible with existing or very near future technology.


Tim Flannery

Leave a reply

Tim Flannery is an Australian scientist and author who wrote a popular 2007 book on global warming called The Weather Makers: How Man Is Changing the Climate and What It Means for Life on Earth. He has a new book out called Sunlight and Seaweed: An Argument for How to Feed, Power and Clean Up the World, which appears to be about, among other things, growing kelp on a massive scale to absorb carbon.

By the way, I don’t sell anything on this site. I’m not against selling things necessarily, but when I signed up as an Amazon affiliate nobody ever bought anything. So I’m just embedding the book covers below for convenience and because I kind of like book cover art.

making carbon fiber from atmospheric CO2

2 Replies

Here is some research on making carbon nanofibers directly from atmospheric CO2. Sounds like a good idea both because you are absorbing CO2 from the atmosphere and because you can make all kinds of light, strong materials from nanofibers, which would allow lighter, safer, more energy efficient vehicles among other things.

Licht estimates electrical energy costs of this “solar thermal electrochemical process” to be around $1,000 per ton of carbon nanofiber product, which means the cost of running the system is hundreds of times less than the value of product output.

“We calculate that with a physical area less than 10 percent the size of the Sahara Desert, our process could remove enough CO2 to decrease atmospheric levels to those of the pre-industrial revolution within 10 years,” he says.