Climate Correction 80:20

 The outline of a new piece I'm working on. What's missing?

The 80:20 Rule of Thumb

Correcting the climate is a huge project that no one can plan out completely, but the 80:20 rule of thumb applies and keeps on turning up in my exploration of solutions. The rule of thumb that any project can be 80% completed with 20% of the total effort, but the remaining 20% will take 80% of the effort fits in many ways. This paper probably covers only 20% of what needs to be done, but probably solves 80% of the problem.

Define the Problem

The 80:20 ratio crops up again. It turns out that when all the contributing factors producing the overheating and stressing the climate are compared, about 80% is down to just carbon dioxide.

Why Can’t Current Policies Work?

Flawed Objectives

The objectives of the Paris Agreement are fundamentally flawed because they lack ambition. They do not aim to return temperature rise and climate to what it used to be before industrialisation. The Net Zero Carbon objective will balance carbon dioxide levels at a new high level and a new high temperature. Even if the more difficult +1.5°C target was attained, it will be maintained. So the ice in Antarctica and Greenland will still carry on melting which will eventually flood all coastal cities. The objective should be more ambitious and say that the temperature increase should peak at +2°C (preferably +1.5°C) and then decrease back to the stable preindustrial levels by Net Negative Carbon.

Disunity

The climate change problem is global so needs a global solution. Current outcomes from the various COPs trying to stick to the Paris Agreement objectives fragment global efforts into national efforts. And the brutal fact is that each nation has to compete with its rivals with the winner being the nation still using the most fossil fuel.

State the Objective

We will return the global climate to preindustrial ranges. That is the climate that has been relatively stable for about 10,000 years, allowing human civilisations to thrive. Part of this objective would be to stop global overheating peaking above the Paris Agreement of +2°C and preferably below +1.5°C.

Copy What Works

Our ozone layer used to have holes poked in it by CFCs. This would have allowed ultraviolet radiation to beat down unfiltered, causing a lot more than deeper suntans.

Plan the Solution

80% turns out to be roughly the amount our carbon dioxide need to be reduced by.

Where Does This Get Us?

This will get us beyond Net Zero Carbon into Net Negative Carbon territory. But even by 2100 we still don’t get back down to preindustrial levels of carbon dioxide. For that we need another 20%, which will probably take another 80% of effort.

Geoengineering

This is tempting, but dangerous. Imagine a seesaw or a balance, with all the weight of the imbalance caused by excess carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases on one side, and geoengineering on the other side. If the pressure from geoengineering is caused by a process that is temporary, such as pumping gases or aerosols into the atmosphere, that pumping has to continue forever. Because if geoengineering ever stops the effect of the greenhouse gases will be uncontrolled and will rapidly push temperatures to dangerous levels.

There is another example with rivers. We have found that the engineering of rivers by straightening them has caused flooding problems. To stop flooding more engineering has been required to store floodwater. So these days rivers are having the old meandering riverbeds restored so that the natural processes can turn the river into a self-managing stable system.