Geo-engineering, Q&A with EarthTalk

Is the plan to sprinkle dust in the stratosphere to reflect some of the sun’s rays away from Earth to prevent global warming science or science fiction?
–M. Jackson, Tampa, FL

Some certainly do consider it science fiction, or worry that it could end up doing more environmental harm than good. Yet others—including Bill Gates and a team of leading Harvard scientists—think it could be the solution to our planetary climate woes.

What we’re talking about is a form of geo-engineering that entails sending up some 800 jumbo planes to sprinkle their payload of millions of tons of chalk dust in the stratosphere 12 miles above the Earth’s surface in an effort to reflect some of the sun’s heat back into space to turn the tide on climate change.

The so-called Stratospheric Controlled Perturbation Experiment (SCoPEx) was developed by chemist James Anderson and physicist David Keith, both of Harvard—with funding from Bill Gates—“to advance understanding of stratospheric aerosols that could be relevant to solar geoengineering.” The researchers want to test their hypothesis with a $3 million experiment 12 miles above the Southwestern United States where they would steer remote controlled balloons to disperse small plumes of calcium carbonate.

The balloons would then turn around and observe any differences in the amount of solar radiation getting through. This system is adapted from a similar design the researchers used in groundbreaking research analyzing the composition of the stratospheric ozone layer.

But the test plan, initially slated for early 2019, has received some pushback from scientists and environmentalists, who worry that such tinkering could cause negative chain reactions and unforeseen irreversible consequences.

“Some researchers have suggested that solar geoengineering could alter precipitation patterns and even lead to more droughts in some regions,” reports Jeff Tollefson on Nature.com. “Others warn that one of the possible benefits of solar geoengineering—maintaining crop yields by protecting them from heat stress—might not come to pass.” He cites a 2018 study showing that yields of wheat, corn, rice and soy fell after two major volcanic eruptions darkened skies around the planet and took a toll on crop yields.

Given such concerns, Anderson and Keith are erring on the side of caution, setting up an external advisory committee to review the project and point out potential safety concerns to head off negative side effects. “Getting it done right is far more important than getting it done quickly,” says Peter Frumhoff of the Union of Concerned Scientists.

If they can pull off a successful test and then scale the idea, the good news is it might even be something the governments of the world—and/or some rich benefactors—can afford. An October 2018 report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change found that dispersing enough sulfur in the stratosphere with a similar (cooling) intent could be done for less than $10 billion/year—and possibly for as little as $1 billion/year. While that might seem like a lot, it’s a bargain if it can save our environment, our civilization, and our very existence on the planet.

CONTACTS: SCoPEx; “First sun-dimming experiment will test a way to cool Earth”.

EarthTalk® is produced by Roddy Scheer & Doug Moss for the 501(c)3 nonprofit EarthTalk. Send questions to: question@earthtalk.org.

Environmental Studies, Q&A with EarthTalk

I’m going into my senior year in high school and am looking for a college focused on sustainability where I can major in environmental studies. Any ideas?
–Mike Mitchell, Oakland, CA

Depending on how deeply you want to go into environmental studies, there are many colleges that could meet your green-minded learning needs. A great place to begin research is the Princeton Review’s annual “Guide to 399 Green Colleges.” The 9th annual version was released late last year and ranked the College of the Atlantic (COA) in Bar Harbor, Maine as the nation’s greenest institution of higher learning. Completing the Top 15, in rank order: SUNY Syracuse, University of Vermont (UVM), Dickinson College, St. Mary’s College of Maryland, Colorado State, Pitzer, Cornell, Randolph College, Stanford, UC Davis, Seattle University, Santa Clara University, American University and Goucher College.

The first American institution of higher learning to focus primarily on the relationship between humans and the environment, the College of the Atlantic in Bar Harbor, Maine became the first carbon-neutral college in 2007 and plans to be completely rid of fossil fuels on campus by 2030.

In general, colleges made the top of the list if sustainability factored prominently in their academic offerings, campus policies, initiatives, activities and career preparation for students. Princeton Review tallied data from survey responses submitted by administrators at 648 different colleges during the 2017-2018 school year. Several of the survey questions drill down on the given school’s sustainability-related policies, practices and programs, weighting 25+ data points to create a “Green Rating” score on a scale of 60 to 99 for each college surveyed, with 399 colleges qualifying as “green” with overall scores of 80+.

It’s no surprise that COA, established in 1969 as the first American college to focus primarily on the relationship between humans and the environment, has topped the list for three years running. With only 350 students and 35 faculty members, small classes and focused learning are the norm at COA, which has been churning out environmental leaders for five decades. It became the first carbon-neutral college in 2007 and plans to be completely rid of fossil fuels on campus by 2030.

At the #2 school on the “green colleges” list, SUNY Syracuse’s College of Environmental Science and Forestry, students and faculty work together on developing innovative solutions to environmental challenges and can focus on applying what they learn in internships reserved for them with the New York Department of Environmental Conservation.

Next on the list, UVM has incorporated sustainability into campus policies and curricula for decades, but has recently shown renewed leadership with its Sustainable Entrepreneurship program and campus-wide commitment to waste reduction and energy conservation. UVM has been sourcing all of its energy from renewables since 2015, with solar panels all over campus to make the most of the fleeting Vermont sun.

Some other schools with excellent environmental studies and science programs include Antioch, Reed, Middlebury, Colby, Colorado College, Montana State, Evergreen State, Pomona, and the universities of Idaho, Michigan, Montana, North Carolina, Texas, Washington and Wisconsin. In fact, today it might be harder to find a school with no regard for sustainability than otherwise, so you should find a college where you feel at home on campus and then make sure the academic programs line up with your own green perspective.

CONTACTS: Princeton Review’s “Guide to 399 Green Colleges”; College of the Atlantic; SUNY Syracuse’s College of Environmental Science and Forestry; University of Vermont.

EarthTalk® is produced by Roddy Scheer & Doug Moss for the 501(c)3 nonprofit EarthTalk. Send questions to: question@earthtalk.org.

Big Copper and Gold Mine Near Alaska’s Bristol Bay, Q&A with EarthTalk

What’s the background of the controversy over whether to allow development of a big copper and gold mine near Alaska’s Bristol Bay?
–C. Karo, Pittsburgh, PA

Environmentalists, fishermen and Native Americans breathed a sigh of relief in 2014 when the Obama administration invoked a rarely used provision in the Clean Water Act to block the proposed development of the Pebble Mine near Alaska’s Bristol Bay, one of the most productive fisheries in the world. At the time, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) found that the proposed mine would cause “complete loss of fish habitat due to elimination, dewatering and fragmentation of streams, wetlands and other aquatic resources” in parts of Bristol Bay.

If the Pebble Mine project is allowed to proceed after all, the nearby Bristol Bay fishery — one of the richest in the world — may never recover. Emma Forsberg, FlickrCC.

But Northern Dynasty Minerals, the Canadian company behind the proposed mine, hasn’t given up pushing for the project which could yield some 10 billion tons of recoverable ore (including lots of copper as well as gold and molybdenum). Only one other ore deposit of its type in the world, Indonesia’s Grasberg Mine, is bigger.

An early August 2019 meeting between Alaska’s conservation Republican governor Mike Dunleavy and President Trump on the tarmac as Air Force One refueled in Anchorage on its way back from the G20 summit in Japan led to an announcement the next day that the EPA was rescinding its original veto and green-lighting the Pebble Mine development after all.

As soon as word got out, dozens of former and current EPA officials and researchers came out to say the reversal ignores the science that warns of total ecosystem collapse which, forgetting about the effects on marine wildlife and the subsistence culture of Alaska Natives, could decimate the $1.5 billion Bristol Bay fishery and its 14,000 jobs.

According to the non-profit Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), the EPA conducted extensive scientific assessment of the Bristol Bay watershed to determine the potential impacts of large-scale mining on salmon and other fish populations, wildlife, development and Alaska Native communities in the region.

EPA’s Watershed Assessment found that Pebble Mine would have significant impacts on fish populations and streams surrounding the mine site. A tailings dam failure releasing toxic mine waste would have catastrophic effects on the ecosystem and region.

Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC)

The EPA’s conclusions were derived from three years of data review, scientific analysis, public hearings, peer review and revision.

Up until now, EPA has taken every precaution to ensure that its assessment represents the best science regarding potential large-scale mining in the Bristol Bay watershed.

Why the Trump administration would sell out the region’s fisheries and millennia-old culture for a quick sale followed by a cut-and-run mining operation by a Canadian mining company is anybody’s guess. Environmentalists are sure to fight the Pebble Mine development just as hard now as they did five years ago leading up to when President Obama blocked it. But this time will be more of an uphill battle given the tenor of the times and who’s in the White House.

To express your concerns about Pebble Mine, send your elected representatives a message via the “Take Action” section of the website of the non-profit conservation group Save Bristol Bay.

CONTACTS: NRDC; Save Bristol Bay.

EarthTalk® is produced by Roddy Scheer & Doug Moss for the 501(c)3 nonprofit EarthTalk. Send questions to: question@earthtalk.org.