On page 129, regarding future research directions, the plan mentions iron fertilization of the oceans, an idea now largely discredited as incapable of reducing atmospheric CO2 due to infeasibility and time scales involved: “There are a multitude of R&D opportunities regarding the effectiveness and environmental consequences of ocean fertilization. One question is whether iron enrichment increases the downward transport of carbon from the surface waters to the deep sea.”
On page 131 “Capture CO2 directly from the atmosphere” is listed as a long-term (40-60 year) goal, but no further discussion is given.
Finally, on page 201, Exploratory Research: “Novel concepts might be used to mitigate the effects of global warming in the stratosphere (e.g., geoengineered solar insulation.” I think they must have been referring to reducing solar insolation (see Oak Ridge comments below).
The Public Review draft of the plan (8) mentions that one commenter said that the plan was deficient for not discussing geoengineering options. There were also only about 50 unique commenters on the plan, suggesting a lack of interest on the part of stakeholders with regard to the importance of the plan.
A technical review (9) by Oak Ridge National Laboratory of the CCTP’s R&D portfolio provided as input to the Strategic Plan, on pages xi, 41 and 42 recommended that greater emphasis be placed on exploratory research such as direct atmospheric CO2 capture and geoengineering the Earth’s rate of solar insolation with nanoparticles of aluminum and increasing the Earth’s surface albedo to reduce temperatures and NOx production.
Ironically, these reports do address future technology development to reduce jet engine soot emissions. One of the approaches proposed here to offset global warming is to increase soot emissions. The reports also recommend sending monitoring satellites to the L1 point, 900,000 miles from Earth to detect aerosols in the atmosphere.
A proposal to send diffraction lenses to the L1 point to reduce incoming sunlight (10) has been largely ignored by the government. Granted, the lens proposal is beyond the scope of current technology and sending monitoring satellites seems much more feasible, but a reading of the strategic plan finds numerous examples of technologies that are today considered infeasible, but endorsed by the CCTP.
The use of particulate matter, including the widely available aluminum oxide to block sunlight has been considered before (11). The use of nanoparticles of aluminum oxide is a 21st century improvement on the relatively larger micron sized particles suggested previously. However, although aluminum oxide nanoparticles are now manufactured and sold commercially (12, 13), whether or not sufficient quantities could be produced is unknown to me. Other materials as simple as soil have been suggested in the past, so what goes into a naval rifle shell can be left to the imagination.
The stated lack of interest on the part of the CCTP in geoengineering, if taken at face value, means that there is no ongoing U.S. government funded research in this area and for the U.S. to ramp up a program on its own will take some time. Thus, it would be the next administration at the earliest that could be seen as putting emphasis on and committing resources to this area.
A very recent article (14) quoted the chairman of the House Committee on Government Reform as being disappointed that the CCTP hadn’t included geoengineering in its research portfolio and hinted that future hearings of the committee might include this as a topic.
