Massive Climate Control Contraptions (MCCC) and Other Fantastical Means to Fight Global Warming

A Tesla Climate Control Device?

A Tesla Climate Control Device?

Today’s article was inspired by an obscure story, which heralded renewed efforts to attack global warming and head off predicted climate disaster with fantastical technologies.  You can see the story here,

Variously called Geo-Engineering or Climate Engineering (by believers) and referenced as massive climate control contraptions (MCCC) by skeptics (and ridiculers), this approach is now being taken seriously in some (serious) quarters, as more incremental solutions appear dead in the ozone layer.

I will, heretofore, refer to big, out of the box — way out — thinking about global warming using the whimsical “MCCC.”   Some examples of MCCC include:  ships that spew salt into the air to block sunlight; satellites designed to bounce solar rays back into space; and massive “reverse” power plants that would suck carbon from the atmosphere.  This barely scratches the surface.

These are but a few of the ideas the National Academy of Sciences has asked a panel of some of the nation’s top climate scientists to investigate. Several agencies requested the inquiry, including the CIA.   It’s hard to get much more “establishment” than that.

It’s apparent that many supporters of more practical initiatives to attack global warming, recognize their ideas have hit a brick wall.  Hail Mary passes, the grand slam homer, and buzzer beating three pointer several feet behind the arc, are taken more seriously now, perhaps by default.

Around 2008, just at about the time the U.S. and the world economy were in free fall, many U.S. states were pushing ahead with measures, long in the works, to reduce carbon emissions. These included regulatory and tax policies, and more practical, proven, smaller scale technologies,  from energy saving appliances to better coal plant scrubbers.  Bad timing!  Cap and trade,  high carbon taxes and many other measures to combat global warming, were a tough sell to begin with.  They faced impossible hurdles with an economy in free fall and double digit unemployment. Even with partial economic recovery, these efforts remain stalled.

Six years ago might have been the perfect time to ramp up efforts to attack global warming with MCCC.   The stimulus package passed by Congress included some research and development and risky capital investments to fight climate change.  These projects were not quite in the MCCC category, but they were still controversial.  Traditional stimulus spending in a recession has been on more basic projects, like public infrastructure, less policy driven, and less risky.  Although stimulus spending on clean energy did bear some fruit (and actually created some jobs), all the mainstream media seem to recall is the Solyndra “scandal.”  Check out the controversy over the 60 Minutes segment (or hit piece?)  on “massive private and public sector failures” to promote big technology solutions to global warming.  Both the failures and successes are discussed here. The 60 Minutes segment specialized in the failure side of things.  

Indeed, it would seem that big technology, even MCCC, would have been in play much sooner, even before incrementalism hit a wall when the Great Recession came along.    Cap and trade, high carbon taxes,and (even) gradual reduction of carbon emissions have so many moving parts, require so much economic dislocation, sacrifice, and behavioral change, they were destined to stall.  You would think MCCC might have been a serious international strategy from the beginning; or at least pursued on a parallel track.   But it wasn’t. Why not?

Some reasons are obvious. MCCC is very risky, not just because it’s fantastical. If we invent a  machine that can suck up most of the world’s green house gases in a few gulps, it can also have catastrophic, unintended consequences for the climate.  Tesla’s electrical experiments in downtown Manhattan are nothing compared to out of control MCCC.  MCCC also requires massive spending by government, big time venture capitalists-philanthropists (Gates, Buffet et. al), or both.  

Among the less obvious reasons for spurning MCCC, but perhaps more importantly, advocates of cap and trade, high carbon taxes, and gradual reduction of carbon emissions thought, and still believe, that (false?) hopes about MCCC would make it even more difficult to gain support for their  more practical, but immediate, measures.  The hope of MCCC is a perfect excuse to avoid tough measures NOW, while we pray and wait for the miracle.   If the fantastical technologies fail, we’d have nothing.  Better to mock MCCC.   Here is an example of some fierce opposition, on those grounds, to MCCC. 

Keep an eye on the workings of the National Academy of Sciences panel.  Unless you live in California or under a few other die hard governments that haven’t given up, this may be the only game in town.   If this scares you, here is another fantastical, but low tech, approach to save the planet, which may help you sleep better, or help you to sleep through it all.

Advertisements

2 thoughts on “Massive Climate Control Contraptions (MCCC) and Other Fantastical Means to Fight Global Warming

  1. Alex MacLachlan

    Without making an argument on either side of the debate, how about the US just undertake a massive forestation project, since the US government is the largest landowner in the country. We can’t do anything about volcanic action negating decades of environmental regulations and stopping China, India, or other third World countries from massively polluting on their way to a vast middle class, has proven relatively fruitless. Lets start building another Alaskan pipeline that transports water from Alaska, Canada, Washington, Oregon, Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Michigan, Maine, etc, using the existing rights of way of existing oil pipelines. Reforesting our National Parks and private lands that are currently inhospitable to many plant species would be a good start towards MCCC. We have millions of acres that could support billions of plants, shrubs and trees (with a little help from the US Forest Service Pipeline Project). Biologists could identify high CO2 gulping / low water need plants and trees that support wildlife, erosion control, and YES, US farmers in drought vulnerable, but sunny growing regions. It would be good for the environment, the economy, and our National Parks that have lost many trees to insects and disease over the years. There would be something for almost every interest group but managing it honestly and honorably would be the challenge.

    Like

    Reply
  2. Irv Lefberg

    Thanks for interesting comment, Alex. Yeah, your idea is along the lines of MCCC in that it’s large scale, and attackes the problem massively and directly. But, and this is of course good, unlike most of MCCC ideas, it is based on (more) practical and proven technoloigy…and the forces of nature. Interesting! Wonder if such an approach would be transferable to India, China, Brazil, Mexico, Africa, etc. Could it outpace (even just keep pace with) the rate of deforestation in those places? We know it wouldn’t hurt. Again, interesting. Will google this idea and see what I get. Surely some climate scientist has modeled this????

    Let me also add another concept here from one (unamed) commenter who chose to comment privately, He sent me information about an “Adaptation” approach — i.e.,”accept” (to some degree) the “dire” effects of climate change, but, rather than aiming all our efforts at preventing it, mitigate the effects and help societies adapt. That’s yet another interesting alternative. Some of that is of course going on, such as efforts to keep (or move) people out of places where sea levels are expected to rise. Or improving hurricane and tsunami warnings. And so on. But, I bet the climate scientists would argue that if we give up on reversing the effects of human induced climate change, or preventing more damage, Adaptation will only help us deal a little better with Round One of climate catasptrophe.

    In general, its good people are thinking about other approaches (if you believe we’re in dire trouble), now that Plan A is on the ropes.

    Like

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s