Skip to content

The only hope of keeping our planet habitable now demands sucking of CO2 out of the Earth’s atmosphere, according to a new study.

We can feel happy about how re have reduced emitting green house gas today, but the Earth is going to continue warming for centuries. Unfortunately, permafrost and Artic ice irreversibly melting.

The journal of Scientific Reports published a research on Thursday which talked about this subject. The research states that even  if we are successful in dropping the emission rate to  zero this year, the global temperature will inevitably rise by  5 degree Fahrenheit.

The lead author of the study, Jorgen Randers has clearly stated that the Tundra is going to continue to melt for the next 500 years, no matter how fast we down on greenhouse gas emissions.

This is because the process of climate change isn’t going to change overnight, it is a vicious self-sustaining cycle. As the permafrost melts, it releases more and more greenhouse gases, like carbon dioxide and methane, which contribute to global warming. According to Randers the only solution is that we suck carbon dioxide back out of the atmosphere.

The rising sea levels:

Randers’ study has come up with the effects of numerous emission control scenarios on the climate of the earth between 1850 and 2020.

But the data obtained from the study isn’t pleasing! It showed if the emissions can be stopped completely this year, then the sea levels will still be over 8 feet higher than that in 1850.

In order to prevent the projected 3-degree-celsius rise in temperature, the emission rate of greenhouse gasses would have to  zero between 1960 and 1970. Considering this fact, our planet has passed its climatic point of no return, about 50 years ago! Much before anyone could grasp the importance and severeness of climate change.

We need to suck carbon out of the atmosphere

The much talked about Paris climate agreement was made with the long term intention of cutting down on green house gas emissions to a rate which would keep the planet’s overall temperature from rising from than 2 degree celcius by the year 2100.

But according to the findings of Randers’ report even if the emission are completely stopped by 2100  sea levels in the year 2050 would be more than 10 feet higher than that in 1850.

We are already on the track to go past the temperatures predicted by the Paris agreement. Last year itself we had the second warmest year for surface temperatures and the warmest for  the oceans. Polar melting is a scary and inevitable truth that will cause the sea levels to rise by 3 feet by the year 2100 and threatens to displace more than  hundred million people!

According to  Randers the only solution to this  problem is if the governments and companies begin developing new technologies and methods for a large scale reduction of greenhouse gases from the Earth’s atmosphere.

In more technical terms, the above strategy is known as carbon capture and storage. In order to prevent excess warming after the emissions are completely stopped, at least 37 billion tons of carbon dioxide would need to  be removed from the atmosphere every year. This amount is roughly equal to the entire carbon dioxide emission of the fossil fuel industry in 2018.

Few power plants in Canada and USA have already began employing carbon capture and storage to control  their emissions.  Six years ago, the Boundary Dam Power Station in Saskatchewan successfully became the first in using this technology.

Today a total of, 20 commercial-scale carbon-capture projects are functioning around the globe, and numerous more are in development phase. These projects are capable of storing carbon deep inside ground in depleted oil and gas fields or in bioreactor containers filled with algae that feed on carbon dioxide.

Two US carbon-capture plants completed in 2018, one of which is in Illinois, one in Texas, can capture up to 1.1 million and 1.6 million tons of carbon dioxide, every year. But the true quantity of Carbon dioxide that needs to be removed from the atmosphere needs far more plants than any current project calls for.

Delhi, India

Advantages and disadvantages of geoengineering

Carbon capture is quickly becoming widely regarded as a safe and potentially effective form of geoengineering. Climate interventions like this are increasingly being coined by scientists and politicians alike; Andrew Yang, a 2020 Democratic candidate, offered budgeting $860 million for further geoengineering work in the US.

But most climate-interventionprograms would be far riskier compared to CCS. Lets take solar geoengineering, for example, which involves injecting aerosols into the sky in order to reflect sunlight back into space.

Critics of this idea have said that most models which predict the effects of solar geoengineering wouldn’t stay localized. If a particularnation decided to independently use such measures, varying and unpredictable effects would likely be seen in other spots around the planet.

Aerosol injections used in the southern hemisphere, for example, could easily impact ocean temperatures and wind speeds, leading to more storms and hurricanes in the northern hemisphere.

FracturedVeilBest Upcoming Open world Survival Game 2021

Explore new maps where the sky touches the sea and danger hides behind every tree.
Join our discord server and steam community for more updates.