# How Can We Address Climate Change Besides Limiting Emissions? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [July 20, 2022, 3:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-can-we-address-climate-change-besides-limiting-emissions/968265 "2022-07-20T15:34:14Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 9
**Author:** ![md-2000](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9d8465/32.png) [@md-2000](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/md-2000)\ **Post date:** [August 2, 2022, 5:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-can-we-address-climate-change-besides-limiting-emissions/968265/161 "2022-08-02T05:18:23Z")
> [@eburacum45](#): > > > [@md-2000](#): > > > > We’re due to return to the ice ages perhaps, sometime in the next thousand years or more. > > Not true, it seems. If we ignore anthropogenic global warming, the current interglacial is likely to last about 50,000 years, according to Berger and Loutre. > [https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.1076120](https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.1076120) > > I would note that their calculation has been subject to some dispute, but in any case anthropogenic effects will probably make this all irrelevant. I refer to the graph in post 121 of Dr. Strangelove’s. there are temperature peaks about every 100MY to 125MY, similar to the one we are in since about 12,000Y ago. None of those peaks last an appreciable time - certainly not 62,000 years. Our current warm spell, if we are _lucky_ lasts 25,000 years. Perhaps this one particular warm spell, even without human intervention messing it up, will be different from all the last million years, just like the last solar cycle was predicted to be one of the busiest ever. The moral of the story is Mother Nature does what she wants. No matter how badly humans mess it up, she has the last laugh. Plus, there’s the risk of local variation - for example, the melting Greenland ice sheet turning off the conveyor that allows the Gulf Stream to warm northern Europe. Anything could happen. But… In one aspect you are right. The less we mess with the environment and the quicker we fix what we’ve done. the less of a mess we will make of what _could_ happen. If we’ve effectively postponed the next ice age for the foreseeable future, then when it happens is irrelevant. > [@wolfpup](#): > > The observation I made was factually correct and scientifically accurate, and was specifically addressed to the argument that one often hears from climate change deniers and “skeptics” to the effect that the earth has no fixed “ideal” temperature, so what’s wrong with a little warming – it might even be beneficial! This is a dangerously incorrect and grossly misleading argument, yet it’s been made by people like the notorious denier Richard Lindzen, now retired but formerly a notable atmospheric physicist who definitely knows better but always enjoyed being a disingenuous contrarian for fun and profit. The problem is the problem… Canada might say “it gets so \*\*\*\*\* cold up here, we could use global warming.” This ignores that we also see catastrophic heat waves, droughts, flood, extreme storms, and all sorts of other less beneficial effects of climate change. BC was notable for it’s cool rainy environment, much like Seattle or Portland to the south. Instead, it got a massive heat wave and catastrophic forest fires last year. (49°C or 120F is nothing to ignore…). We certainly don’t want the American “tornado alley” to migrate north with the climate. The problem I see with the platic sheet Idea is that as I understand, L1 is an unstable orbit point - It’s akin to trying to place a ball bearing on top of a hill - the least perturbation would start it moving away from the desired point. Big very thin sheets sound like the ideal material to be pushed by the light itself, which is the concept of a solar sail. ---
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [August 2, 2022, 6:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-can-we-address-climate-change-besides-limiting-emissions/968265/162 "2022-08-02T06:49:32Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > Obviously any attempt in this direction will be based on a net temperature decrease. Sure. It’s just not obvious to me that the possible solution you’re proposing would necessarily create a net temperature decrease, once you factor in all the emissions involved in creating, deploying and maintaining it. ---
**Author:** ![eburacum45](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/eburacum45/32/8690_2.png) [@eburacum45](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/eburacum45)\ **Post date:** [August 2, 2022, 7:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-can-we-address-climate-change-besides-limiting-emissions/968265/163 "2022-08-02T07:17:45Z")
> [@md-2000](#): > > I refer to the graph in post 121 of Dr. Strangelove’s. there are temperature peaks about every 100MY to 125MY, similar to the one we are in since about 12,000Y ago. None of those peaks last an appreciable time - certainly not 62,000 years. Our current warm spell, if we are _lucky_ lasts 25,000 years. Berger and Loutre calculated their prediction using the Milankovitch cycles, giving a somewhat more reliable estimate than just estimating the average length of interglacials. They note that a long interglacial of this type has happened once before in the last 500,000 years, so it is not entirely unprecedented. More details here > **[Science-2002-Berger-class1.pdf](https://www.tau.ac.il/~harnik/ClimateCourse/reading_assignments/Science-2002-Berger-class1.pdf)** > > 111.25 KB ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [August 2, 2022, 11:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-can-we-address-climate-change-besides-limiting-emissions/968265/164 "2022-08-02T11:13:22Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > By the ever increasing use of wind/solar/wave generators and switching to electric cars to replace CO2 generating machinery. OK, so we manage to do that. We manage to do that so completely that we’re not adding any more carbon dioxide to the atmosphere at all. That still doesn’t answer the question: How do we get rid of the carbon dioxide that’s already there? ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2022, 12:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-can-we-address-climate-change-besides-limiting-emissions/968265/165 "2022-08-03T00:41:53Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > That still doesn’t answer the question: How do we get rid of the carbon dioxide that’s already there? It’s a naturally occurring process now. We could increase that process naturally or artificially as needed. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2022, 12:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-can-we-address-climate-change-besides-limiting-emissions/968265/166 "2022-08-03T00:51:39Z")
It’s a naturally-occurring process that takes millions of years. ---
**Author:** ![md-2000](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9d8465/32.png) [@md-2000](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/md-2000)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2022, 5:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-can-we-address-climate-change-besides-limiting-emissions/968265/167 "2022-08-03T05:38:30Z")
> [@eburacum45](#): > > Berger and Loutre calculated their prediction using the Milankovitch cycles, giving a somewhat more reliable estimate than just estimating the average length of interglacials. Yes, if you look at the graphs in the article, and the insolation level vs. ice volume, it seems our insolation level has already dropped to the same as about 30,000 years ago when glaciers covered the earth - so they are relying on our latent heat, I assume, to keep us safe from the roaming mastodons. To me this means the real answer could be anywhere between “we’ll keep baking” and “ice cream time.” It’s an educated guess- it probably is far more educated than mine, but in the end is still a guess. Global warming may the blessing in disguise that still manages to kill us. There’s only one way to find out, wait and see - or better yet, try to avoid creating more problems. We can’t do anything about future ice or no-ice, but we can certainly work to reduce abnormal CO2 levels. ---
**Author:** ![Kedikat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ed655f/32.png) [@Kedikat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kedikat)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2022, 7:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-can-we-address-climate-change-besides-limiting-emissions/968265/168 "2022-08-03T07:10:16Z")
I always harp on building codes. In the short term it will increase the cost of buildings. But it saves the owners/tenants money over the long term. It may also make the building more comfortable and maybe increase longevity if done right. Decrease energy use. A lot of things we do could be done better for the long term if more thought and money were spent at first. It is short term pain. But long term gain. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [August 5, 2022, 2:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-can-we-address-climate-change-besides-limiting-emissions/968265/169 "2022-08-05T02:34:58Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > It’s a naturally-occurring process that takes millions of years. So planting trees is a waste of time? ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [August 5, 2022, 2:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-can-we-address-climate-change-besides-limiting-emissions/968265/170 "2022-08-05T02:43:33Z")
> [@Kedikat](#): > > I always harp on building codes. > In the short term it will increase the cost of buildings. They used to build houses with a natural air cooling system. It was basically a heat pump that used the hot attic to pull air in from the house. The floors had vents in them to the basement and the basement had windows. It would pull cooler air in from the basement. This concept can be enhanced by running tile underground and drawing air through them to the house. You could use a heat exchanger to better filter the air or run the tiles through the walls into the attic. ---
**Author:** ![MrDibble](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mrdibble/32/114_2.png) [@MrDibble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrDibble)\ **Post date:** [August 5, 2022, 6:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-can-we-address-climate-change-besides-limiting-emissions/968265/171 "2022-08-05T06:34:56Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > So planting trees is a waste of time? If you _just_ plant them and don’t maintain the resulting forests, or just burn the wood as soon as the trees are mature, yes, it would be. ---
**Author:** ![md-2000](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9d8465/32.png) [@md-2000](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/md-2000)\ **Post date:** [August 5, 2022, 12:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-can-we-address-climate-change-besides-limiting-emissions/968265/172 "2022-08-05T12:35:10Z")
> [@Kedikat](#): > > I always harp on building codes. > In the short term it will increase the cost of buildings. But it saves the owners/tenants money over the long term. It may also make the building more comfortable and maybe increase longevity if done right. > Decrease energy use. > A lot of things we do could be done better for the long term if more thought and money were spent at first. > It is short term pain. But long term gain. Yes, there’s plenty of infrastructure that can help the whole process. It’s not just new construction. Retrofitting old houses to better insulate them has been a decent sized industry in Canada, where heating creates a lot of CO2. Also, replacing furnace heating with heat pumps that do double duty as heating and AC, I’ve been reading lately about the same applying, for example, to southern USA to make AC more efficient. Someone I know remarked that houses in New Zealand were never built with insulation in mind, despite the need for AC at times. I assume the same applies to Australia, and a large number of European structures. Then again, hydro power is a really good source of clean electricity - environmentalists will have to consider the carbon offset value when opposing new dams. (Or nuclear power). One tech which could make a big difference is the imminent arrival of electric tractor-trailer trucks. Electrifying some major railroads could also help. The problem is - infrastructure costs money. It takes a significant increase in energy prices to make people consider spending the capital money to do this. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [August 5, 2022, 2:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-can-we-address-climate-change-besides-limiting-emissions/968265/173 "2022-08-05T14:20:15Z")
> [@md-2000](#): > > Also, replacing furnace heating with heat pumps that do double duty as heating and AC, I’ve been reading lately about the same applying, for example, to southern USA to make AC more efficient. It won’t make much difference in the southern US. A heat pump working as an air conditioner is just an air conditioner, and will be about as efficient as a dedicated air conditioning unit, and that’s the vast majority of what’s needed in the southern US. A heat pump can be more efficient than a furnace at heating, but heating in the southern US doesn’t take very much energy to begin with. Still, every little bit helps. What might make a difference in the South is insulation. Good insulation makes it cheaper to heat or cool a house, but I don’t know how many houses in the South have good insulation. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [August 5, 2022, 5:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-can-we-address-climate-change-besides-limiting-emissions/968265/174 "2022-08-05T17:26:36Z")
> [@MrDibble](#): > > If you _just_ plant them and don’t maintain the resulting forests, or just burn the wood as soon as the trees are mature, yes, it would be. And you think that’s what happens with tree planting programs? ---
**Author:** ![md-2000](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9d8465/32.png) [@md-2000](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/md-2000)\ **Post date:** [August 5, 2022, 5:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-can-we-address-climate-change-besides-limiting-emissions/968265/175 "2022-08-05T17:46:54Z")
I would presume that tree-planting needs to be combined with other strategies, like solar and wind power, so that were are trying to reduce the excess carbon put into the atmosphere. If it lasts a century without all burning down, then it will have accomplished something by capturing a large amount of carbon. The question is also - in the long run - centuries - will there be a place for nature to semi-permanently sequester all this carbon, if we stop adding it to the atmosphere? ---
**Author:** ![MrDibble](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mrdibble/32/114_2.png) [@MrDibble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrDibble)\ **Post date:** [August 5, 2022, 7:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-can-we-address-climate-change-besides-limiting-emissions/968265/176 "2022-08-05T19:44:35Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > And you think that’s what happens with tree planting programs? The good ones? No. ---
**Author:** ![Ruken](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/f475e1/32.png) [@Ruken](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ruken)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2022, 1:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-can-we-address-climate-change-besides-limiting-emissions/968265/177 "2022-08-06T13:52:47Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > > [@Chronos](#): > > > > It’s a naturally-occurring process that takes millions of years. > > So planting trees is a waste of time? What does deliberate carbon removal have to do with the the naturally-occuring process without deliberate removal? ---
**Author:** ![Tfletch1](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tfletch1/32/5340_2.png) [@Tfletch1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tfletch1)\ **Post date:** [August 8, 2022, 9:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-can-we-address-climate-change-besides-limiting-emissions/968265/178 "2022-08-08T21:20:42Z")
This sounds pretty cool. > **[New Cheap Carbon Capture Tech Could Be Attached To Tailpipes](https://www.iflscience.com/new-cheap-carbon-capture-tech-could-be-attached-to-tailpipes-64776)** > > A simple and cheap approach could be a useful carbon capture for smokestacks and even tailpipes. ---
**Author:** ![Dr.Strangelove](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dr.strangelove/32/6613_2.png) [@Dr.Strangelove](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dr.Strangelove)\ **Post date:** [August 8, 2022, 9:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-can-we-address-climate-change-besides-limiting-emissions/968265/179 "2022-08-08T21:32:41Z")
Even if the capturing system weighed nothing, you would need to store 300 lbs of CO2 after burning a 15 gallon tank of gas. But the capture system doesn’t weigh nothing. In fact the paper says this: > Under these conditions, the networks exhibited a high CO2 capture rate of 90% with a breakthrough capacity of 1.8 mmol/g. 1.8 mmol of CO2 is 0.0792 g, so effectively they are only storing ~8% of the mass of the capture system (not including tankage, etc.). That 15 gallons of gas now needs 3700 lbs of chemicals to capture. Or you can just put in a 1000 lb battery pack. ---
**Author:** ![Tfletch1](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tfletch1/32/5340_2.png) [@Tfletch1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tfletch1)\ **Post date:** [August 8, 2022, 10:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-can-we-address-climate-change-besides-limiting-emissions/968265/180 "2022-08-08T22:14:46Z")
> [@Dr.Strangelove](#): > > 1.8 mmol of CO2 is 0.0792 g, so effectively they are only storing ~8% of the mass of the capture system (not including tankage, etc.). That 15 gallons of gas now needs 3700 lbs of chemicals to capture. Or you can just put in a 1000 lb battery pack. Maybe I’m confused but aren’t you describing the adsorption capacity? Shouldn’t the breakthrough capacity be just the opposite (the amount that breaks through per gram of adsorbent)? So only 0.0792 g of CO2 escapes per g of CO2 capture material. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-can-we-address-climate-change-besides-limiting-emissions/968265.md?page=8) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-can-we-address-climate-change-besides-limiting-emissions/968265.md?page=10)