How Termination Shocks Could Intensify the Economic Impact of Climate Change

Solar geoengineering: A solution to save ice sheets with potential risks

Credit: Martin Zwick/REDA/Universal Images Group (via Getty Images)

Research indicates that an abrupt halt to solar geoengineering may lead to a “termination shock,” causing a rapid temperature rise that could make the initiative more expensive than continuing without intervention.

With greenhouse gas emissions on the rise, there’s increasing attention on solar radiation management (SRM), which cools the planet by dispersing sulfur dioxide aerosols into the stratosphere to reflect sunlight.

However, sustained solar geoengineering is crucial for centuries; otherwise, the hidden warming could quickly reemerge. This rebound, referred to as termination shock, leaves little time for adaptation and could catalyze critical climate events such as ice sheet collapses.

According to Francisco Estrada, researchers from the National Autonomous University of Mexico assessed the risk of inaction on climate change compared to solar geoengineering approaches.

Projections suggest that if emissions aren’t curtailed, temperatures may soar by an average of 4.5 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels by 2100, leading to approximately $868 billion in economic damages. In contrast, a hypothetical stratospheric aerosol injection program initiated in 2020 could limit warming to around 2.8°C, potentially reducing these costs by half.

Nevertheless, if the aerosol program ends abruptly in 2030, resulting in a temperature rebound of 0.6 degrees Celsius over eight years, economic damages could surpass $1 trillion by century’s end. While estimations vary, Estrada states, “The principle remains consistent: the termination shock will be significantly worse than inaction.”

Estrada’s research innovatively gauges damage not only by global warming levels but also by the speed at which temperatures rise, according to Gernot Wagner from Columbia University.

Wagner warns that solar geoengineering may be riskier than it appears. “This highlights a critical concern,” he notes.

Make Sunsets, a Silicon Valley startup, has already launched over 200 sulfur dioxide-filled balloons into the stratosphere and offers emission offsets for sale. A recent launch in Mexico prompted governmental threats to ban geoengineering activities.

Israel’s Stardust Co., Ltd. has secured $75 million in funding and is lobbying the U.S. government to explore solar geoengineering options. A recent survey revealed that two-thirds of scientists anticipate large-scale SRM could occur this century, as reported by New Scientist.

According to studies, it would take at least 100 aircraft to cool the Earth by 1°C through aerosol injection, releasing millions of tons of sulfur dioxide annually, unimpeded by geopolitical conflicts or unforeseen events.

Presently, major nations like the United States are undermining global climate cooperation, but researchers highlight that such collaboration is essential to prevent termination shock and potentially realize the benefits of SRM.

Analysis of varying parameters suggests that aerosol injections could mitigate climate damage only if the annual probability of cessation is extremely low. In scenarios allowing for a gradual stop over 15 years, SRM might be viable.

If countries successfully reduce emissions, only minimal geoengineering cooling may be necessary, rendering aerosol injection beneficial with a maximum outage probability of 10%. This indicates a potential 99.9% chance of failure over a century, but manageable temperature recovery remains plausible in low emissions scenarios.

This need for international cooperation reveals what Estrada describes as the “governance paradox” of solar geoengineering: “We must ensure extremely low failure rates and possess effective governance to mitigate adverse outcomes.” However, he adds, “If we effectively reduce greenhouse gases, the need for SRM diminishes.”

These findings challenge the notion that solar geoengineering might lead to irresponsible development, as some have suggested, according to Chad Baum from Aarhus University. Funding for this new research was provided by the Degrees Initiative, aimed at supporting geoengineering studies in vulnerable low-income nations.

Baum stated, “We intend to complete all stages of this study, incorporating feedback from impacted communities.”

Despite this, Wagner emphasizes the imperative for further exploration into geoengineering’s trade-offs given the rise in emissions and their consequences: “We are approaching a critical juncture.”

Topics:

Source: www.newscientist.com

Don Lemon files lawsuit against Elon Musk and X for breach of talk show contract termination

Don Lemon, former CNN anchor, has filed a lawsuit against Elon Musk and Company X for breaching a contract with the now-formerly known Twitter social media platform.

The lawsuit, filed in California Superior Court in San Francisco, alleges fraud, negligent misrepresentation, misappropriation of name and likeness, and breach of contract.

Shortly after filming an interview with Musk, Lemon received a text ending their partnership which led to the abrupt termination.

Don Lemon’s lawyer, Carney Shegerian, stated the executives at Company X used Lemon for their advantage and then tarnished his name.

When contacted for comment, Company X responded with an automated message of being busy.

Lemon, once a prominent CNN figure, was let go due to conflicts and poor reviews as a morning show host. He was fired in April 2023.

Linda Yaccarino, CEO of Company X, initially reached out to Lemon’s agent to propose a new show after his CNN departure. The platform aimed to become a video-centric platform.

Lemon’s first scheduled episode on the platform, an interview with Musk, turned tense as Lemon questioned Musk on various topics, leading to the show’s cancellation over creative differences.

Skip Newsletter Promotions

Musk’s increasing conservatism and Lemon’s conflict with the platform’s content direction resulted in the show’s cancellation. Musk’s efforts to attract talent ended with limited success.

The platform’s shift to video content and creator outreach faced challenges with extremism and content moderation issues leading to advertisers pulling out.

Source: www.theguardian.com

Fired Blue Origin Rocket Engine Manager Alleges Unjust Termination After Blowing the Whistle on Safety Concerns

A former program manager for Blue Origin’s BE-4 rocket engine has filed a lawsuit against the company, alleging whistleblowing retaliation after speaking out about safety issues.

The complaint was filed Monday in Los Angeles County Superior Court. It includes a detailed story about program manager Craig Stoker’s seven-month effort to raise concerns about Blue Origin’s safety and harsh working conditions.

Stoker reportedly told two vice presidents in May 2022 that then-CEO Bob Smith’s actions caused employees to “understand safety procedures to meet unreasonable deadlines.” “Frequently violates procedures and processes,” he said. The suit says Smith “exploded” when problems arose, creating a hostile work environment. Mr. Stoker sent a follow-up email containing a formal complaint against Mr. Smith to two vice presidents: Linda Koba, vice president of engine operations, and Mary Plunkett, senior vice president of human resources.

“Myself, my management team, and others within the company do not need to constantly apologize or make excuses to ourselves or our team for the CEO’s bad behavior,” the email said. There is. “We spend a significant amount of time trying to keep things running smoothly, boosting morale, repairing damage, and stopping people from overreacting. . . . Hostile work environment. . . . Our employees , creating a safety and quality risk to our products and customers.”

TechCrunch has reached out to Blue Origin for comment and will update this article if we hear back.

When Mr Stoker asked about a separate investigation into Mr Smith’s actions, Mr Plunkett said the investigation had concluded and Mr Smith was being “coached”.

Just months after filing a formal complaint, Stoker learned that a fellow employee had nearly suffocated while working under an engine nozzle. He expressed his concerns to Michael Stevens, vice president of safety and mission assurance. The complaint says Stoker was “ignored.” In August, Stoker sent another email to executives saying nine people on the engine team were working “over 24-hour” shifts to deliver engines on time to customer United Launch Alliance. expressed concern.

There is no doubt that the company was under pressure to deliver. Blue Origin’s BE-4 will power United Launch Alliance’s Vulcan rocket, which is expected to make its much-delayed debut around Christmas. According to the complaint, Blue Origin’s contract with ULA requires the company to provide one year’s notice of any issues that could affect the delivery of its rocket engines. Stoker wanted to tell ULA that the engine might be delayed.

However, Smith allegedly instructed Stoker not to share these production or delivery issues with ULA.

Ultimately, after an internal investigation, Blue Origin HR concluded that Mr. Smith did not create a hostile work environment or violate company policy. Stoker disagreed with this conclusion. Stoker later learned that officials from the engine program had not been interviewed as part of the investigation, according to the complaint.

The complaint alleges that the human resources department was reluctant to conduct an investigation because the accuser, Mr. Stalker, was a man. “Being a man, Human Resources expected him to deal with problems on his own and not do too much ‘whining,’ and Mr. Stoker was given no means or resources.” He expressed his concerns to the company’s most powerful executive. ”

Stoker was fired on October 7, seven months after he first raised safety concerns. The complaint makes clear who was behind this decision. “Smith spearheaded this termination due to complaints against Mr. Stoker, raising safety/ethics/legal issues, and the fact that many of these reports were intended to disrupt his production/delivery schedule. Ta. “

Blue Origin has announced that Bob Smith will step down as CEO in September after nearly six years. His tenure was a successful one, growing the team from less than 1,000 people to more than 12,000 people and signing numerous high-profile and high-paying contracts with NASA. But it has not been without serious controversy, including allegations of a culture of sexism among senior executives.

Read the full complaint here.

Source: techcrunch.com