To curb global warming, science fiction can come true

Do you remember 'Snowpiercer' (Frosty Train)? It is the sci-fi thriller of Korean director Bong Joon Ho, talking about efforts to regulate climate and prevent global warming. However, things are not as expected and the seeming to bring about a positive change becomes a terrible disaster. The planet returns to the ice age, everything freezes. Only the passengers on the endless train run around the continent. The people in the first car eat sushi and enjoy wine. While the rest have to work hard and eat the protein made from cockroaches. It may sound tragic, but now, scientists have begun seriously thinking about how to deal with climate change in such a way.

Climate news has become alarming in the last few years, especially in the last few months. Last December, scientists were surprised and revealed that the temperature in some parts of the Arctic increased by more than 1.7 degrees Celsius from the average since then. In March, some reports also reported that the Arctic sea ice has dropped to its lowest level since being monitored so far. The warming ocean also killed most of the Great Barrier Reef in Australia. A little more realistic, these effects can be slowed by boosting the development of solar, wind or other renewable energy sources.

A few months ago, scholars from the social and physical sciences interested in climate change gathered in Washington to discuss different approaches, including cooling. the planet by firing porous particles into the stratosphere or increasing the reflection of the clouds to darken sunlight back into space. Chemicals will be transferred to military jets, then sprayed into the atmosphere at a certain height. The clouds above the sea can be increased by reflexes by spraying them with the salt mist drawn from the ocean.

Currently, the world's concern is how to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and not break the promises they agreed on at the climate conference in Paris in December 2015. However, Janos Pasztor, head of Carnegie Geotechnical and Climate Initiative, said: "The fact that we may need more tools even when we achieve these goals" .

Cooling the planet with modern techniques is considered a potential solution to deal with global warming.But if "too much", people can take things out of control.(Photo: Nziff.co.nz).

The carbon dioxide that humans pump into the atmosphere has created more rapid, deeper changes in the world 's climate and ecosystem than expected long ago. According to many scientists, although there are some technologies to help improve the situation, in the next decades, the right atmosphere is still getting hotter. Global emissions will be reduced but not enough to prevent the temperature from rising to extreme levels, thereby damaging crop yields and reducing food production in many parts of the world. In addition, floods will attack coastal cities, killing the lives of millions of mostly poor people.

In order to solve the climate problem, it is necessary to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to zero and remove some of them from the atmosphere. In Washington, although there is still concern about geoengineering , most scientists agree on promoting investment in research around this area, no focusing only on the ability to cool the Earth but also considering the potential effects on the chemical composition of the atmosphere and the weather of different regions of the world.

We know that controlling solar radiation can cool the atmosphere, but so far there are too few studies that simulate this process in the laboratory to understand the working mechanism of the method. Researchers believe an international program should include an open debate about the model needed to deploy technology that has an immediate impact on social and natural life all over the world. gender. In other words, climate engineering should be taken seriously, not a science fiction concept. It can be said that this is a potential solution in dealing with global warming in the next few decades.

David Keith, a Harvard physicist, said: 'Today it is still a taboo, but this taboo is gradually being broken.'

Of course, a project like this will definitely get mixed opinions. The argument against climate intervention by technology is similar to the wave of genetically modified organisms or Frankenfood. It seems to go against nature. Ignoring that abstract argument, some of the things that make us skeptical about the project can be mentioned as: How will the sprayed chemicals affect the stratosphere's ozone? How will the rainfall model be changed? And yet, do countries around the world agree with each other to implement a measure that will create different effects on the territory of each region? Is climate technology cheap enough so that even a middle-income country can deploy independently?

Some scientists estimate that controlling solar radiation can cool the Earth quickly and the cost for this is about $ 5 billion per year. According to Scott Barrett, a Columbia University environmental economist who was at the meeting in Washington: " The biggest challenge of climate engineering is not technology but how we manage it. The use of this unprecedented technology. 'Ethical considerations must be taken into account in any research program.

Alan Robock, a climate scientist at Rutgers University, said that in the worst case scenario, climate refining technology could lead to a nuclear war. However, it is not because of this reason or any other reason to stop conducting research on new technologies. Interfering with nature may be a bad idea for many reasons, but only new studies tell us what will actually happen.