Skip to content

A Messy and Unhinged Introduction to Geoengineering

2023-10-04 · explainer · Hank · 14:45 · watch on YouTube

Topic: Science & nature · mode: Explainer · tags: self promotion, calendar ritual

After backlash to his North Atlantic video and a catch-up with climate scientists Adam and Miriam, Hank reconsiders and gives a quick introduction to geoengineering, broadly any intentional change to Earth's systems but today mostly solar radiation management: its techniques, the case for research, and the objections he now finds compelling, and argues that most climate scientists thinking we don't need it yet is good news, since cutting and removing CO2 and methane is the geoengineering everyone favours.

What is said

The parts of the video and what is said in each (★ — how much it matters to the video).

00:00:00 — Backlash to his North Atlantic geoengineering video, the Radiolab episode, and the Hank's channel conversation with Adam and Miriam

  • ★★ Hank recalls last month's (September 2023) Twitter thread and Vlogbrothers video arguing that low-sulfur ship fuel helped warm the North Atlantic, so we had been accidentally geoengineering and could learn to do it intentionally. — 00:00:00
  • ★★ Hank says some people got pretty mad, some for good reasons; he expected anger but not how much, and some felt betrayed by him. — 00:00:29
  • ★★ Hank says Radiolab asked him to talk about how that day went as a way into geoengineering; the episode is out and great, and he'd love viewers to listen. — 00:00:29
  • ★★ Hank says geoengineering is by far the most controversial idea in climate science: some think it criminal not to be doing it now, others want to ban even research. — 00:00:29
  • ★★★ Out of the field professionally for years, Hank had climate scientists Adam (Climate Adam) and Miriam (Zentouro) talk him through the climate conversation in a new Hank's channel video, which viewers should watch. — 00:00:58 · hankschannel, climate change
  • ★★ Hank urges viewers to follow both scientists' channels, which are accessible and low-lift, joking it would put them among the most informed people on climate change. (playful) — 00:00:58 · climate change

00:01:27 — Defining geoengineering; why intent matters; white roofs and a list of techniques

  • ★★★ Hank sets out a quick intro to why geoengineering is interesting and so controversial, and why most climate scientists opposing it is very good news. — 00:01:27

  • ★★ Hank defines geoengineering, a contested term, as broadly any action meant to change Earth's systems; today it almost always means changing the amount of heat in the system. — 00:01:27 · Earth

    “it's any time you take an action to intentionally change the systems of planet Earth”

  • ★★ Hank says intent matters: a century of burning fossil fuels warmed the planet accidentally, so it was not geoengineering, though it is no longer really an accident. — 00:01:56 · climate change

  • ★★ Hank says painting roofs white is already geoengineering: it mainly cuts air-conditioning bills and energy use, but also reflects some, unmeasurable, energy to space. — 00:02:22
  • ★★ Hank lists techniques of rising impact: high-albedo crops, ocean mirrors, marine cloud brightening, thinning heat-trapping cirrus clouds, and stratospheric sulfur dioxide injection. — 00:03:07

00:03:37 — Solar radiation management: the case for research and two fossil-fuel objections Hank dismisses

  • ★★ Hank says high-albedo crops would have a small, local, reversible effect, stratospheric injection a large, global, long-term one; all are solar radiation management techniques. — 00:03:37
  • ★★★ Hank says heat is a big part of the problem (not all: ocean acidification would not be helped) and is already making life harder, getting worse decade by decade for a while. — 00:04:06 · climate change
  • ★★★ Hank says not knowing how much worse it will get is another argument for geoengineering research: a tool in our back pocket in case things worsen faster than expected. — 00:04:06
  • ★★ To the objection that geoengineering will enrich fossil fuel companies, Hank says he does not care who gets rich saving the planet. — 00:05:04
  • ★★ Hank is not much worried that managing heat would let us burn fossil fuels forever: he thinks it is wrong, because renewables are simply better. — 00:05:04
  • ★★ Hank says the cost of solar, wind and batteries has fallen about a thousand times since he graduated college, and they are already better than fossil fuel infrastructure in most ways. (hedged) — 00:05:54
    • check: thousand times — doubtful
  • ★★ Hank predicts that in 10 to 20 years renewables will be far better than fossil fuel infrastructure, and we simply won't use fossil fuels. (hedged) — 00:05:54

00:06:15 — The compelling objections: trolley problem, war, termination shock, unilateral action, poor understanding, one planet

  • ★★★ Hank's first compelling objection: geoengineering is by definition a trolley problem, harming some areas to help the planet, and the scientists he talked to are uncomfortable with being asked to advise on an action that saves a million lives but causes thousands of deaths. — 00:06:15
  • ★★ Hank says US carbon dioxide emissions already cause death and suffering, but incidentally, not on purpose; doing it on purpose matters, though part of him thinks it shouldn't. — 00:06:45 · United States, Indiana
  • ★★ Hank's example: marine cloud brightening might take water that would have rained over land, so crops fail and people lose income and food. (hypothetical, hedged) — 00:07:21
  • ★★★ Hank says countries already accept such trade-offs at home (closing coal plants), but one country deciding for another is different, so geoengineering could cause war. (hedged) — 00:07:21
  • ★★ Hank says cutting a neighbour's rainfall feels intentional in a way US and Chinese coal burning does not, and he is trying to accept that how it feels matters. — 00:08:04 · United States, China
  • ★★★ Hank says suddenly stopping after doing it for a while is very scary: climate models show possibly chaotic consequences, called termination shock. — 00:08:53
  • ★★ Hank reports Miriam's point: geoengineering should not be done unilaterally but could be, since it is cheap enough for a single, even small, country to start. — 00:08:53
  • ★★ Hank says it should ideally be done by all countries reaching agreement, which sounds almost impossible, though diplomacy has handled big hard things before. — 00:09:23
  • ★★★ Hank's second most compelling objection: we don't understand it well yet; Miriam says aerosols add the most to climate models' error bars. — 00:09:52
  • ★★ Hank asks what if stratospheric injection cooled the planet a degree but dried up Southeast Asia's monsoon, leaving hundreds of millions food insecure. (hypothetical, speculative) — 00:10:21
  • ★★★ Hank's most important reason for caution: we have one planet, already messing with it, and fixing that by messing with it more is understandably terrifying. — 00:10:50 · Earth

00:11:16 — Adam's point that testing means already geoengineering; second thoughts on marine cloud brightening

  • ★★ Hank reports Adam's point that an experiment revealing geoengineering's impacts already requires geoengineering. — 00:11:16
  • ★★★ Hank says continuing the accidental marine cloud brightening didn't seem scary to him, but maybe it is: seawater spraying might pull rain from elsewhere or salt croplands. (hedged) — 00:11:16

00:12:14 — Hopeful news: scientists don't think we need it yet; carbon removal as the geoengineering everyone favours

  • ★★★ Hank's most hopeful takeaway: climate scientists mostly think we don't need geoengineering yet; despite dire talk on social media, the problem still looks solvable without this possible last resort. — 00:12:14 · social media
  • ★★ Hank poses what he calls a fascinating question, deliberately stretching the term: is removing carbon dioxide from the air solar radiation management? He says yes, since putting it there would have been, had that been the goal. — 00:12:59
  • ★★★ Hank says the geoengineering everyone favours is cutting methane and CO2 emissions and reducing what is already in the atmosphere; all experts agree less means less heat. — 00:12:59

00:13:29 — Closing on consensus; links to the conversation and channels; the Pizzamas 'It is False to Suggest' bundle

  • ★★ Hank says individuals and societies are acting, but not as fast as he'd like, and not going faster will have tremendous negative consequences. — 00:13:29 · climate change
  • ★★ Hank links his Hank's channel conversation with Miriam and Adam, Adam's very good video about Hank's video, and both scientists' channels. — 00:13:29 · hankschannel
  • ★★ Hank plugs today's Pizzamas special, the 'It is False to Suggest' bundle pairing the Pizzamas hot sauce with a second US-only product, with mock disclaimers against smothering its tiny seedlings in the sauce and nibbling them. — 00:14:10 · Pizzamas

Threads in this video

Where the stories that moved here went next

Mentioned

Central: Climate engineering · trolley problem

Also: Projects: hankschannel · Pizzamas

Works: Radiolab

Concepts: carbon dioxide · Carbon dioxide removal · climate change · climate model · coal · energy transition · Food security · fossil fuel · Marine cloud brightening · methane · Ocean acidification · scientific consensus · social media · solar power · Solar radiation management · Stratospheric aerosol injection · Sulfur dioxide · Termination shock · war · wind power

Places: Atlantic Ocean · China · Earth · Indiana · United States

Only in the description or credits: Adam Levy · Miriam Nielsen · Neal Stephenson

Also centred on Climate engineering: The Biggest Science Story of the Week

Replies to

← Previous: Nourished by Leaving · Next → America's Second Favorite Fourth Tier English Soccer Team