发布日期:2022-11-01 00:13

本文摘要:In a lab at Harvard, researchers are trying to replicate the conditions of the stratosphere–the part of the atmosphere that stretches roughly six to 31 miles above the surface of the planet–in test tubes. Their goal: to better understand w


In a lab at Harvard, researchers are trying to replicate the conditions of the stratosphere–the part of the atmosphere that stretches roughly six to 31 miles above the surface of the planet–in test tubes. Their goal: to better understand what might happen if humanity eventually decides to embark on a radical, controversial plan to temporarily cool the planet by spraying clouds of particles into the sky.在哈佛大学的一个实验室里,研究人员企图在试管中拷贝平流层的条件--大气层的一部分,在地球表面上伸延大约6至31英里。他们的目标是:更佳地解读如果人类最后要求开始一项保守的、有争议的计划——通过向天空涌出粒子云来继续加热地球——什么将不会再次发生。If it ever happens, the process might involve sending planes into the sky to release particles of a compound like sulfur dioxide that can reflect some sunlight back into space and could temporarily cool the planet. Its not a fix for climate change, and its a form of geoengineering so extreme that it carries risks that may not be fully predictable. But as climate change progresses, its possible that the global community may someday decide it has to try it.如果知道再次发生了这种情况,这个过程有可能还包括向空中升空飞机,使其获释二氧化硫等化合物的粒子,这种化合物能将一些阳光光线返太空,并能继续让地球降温。


Our team here is doing the research because we believe theres still a lot of uncertainties around solar geoengineering, and we think theres a chance for potential benefits around the world, says Elizabeth Burns, managing director for Harvards Solar Geoengineering Research Program. But we also think theres the chance for very real risks.哈佛大学太阳能地球工程研究项目总经理伊丽莎白·伯恩斯说道:我们的团队正在展开这项研究,因为我们坚信太阳能工程依然不存在很多不确定性,我们指出全世界都有可能借此获益。但我们也指出这不存在现实的风险。In one new study in Nature Climate Change, researchers from Harvard, MIT, and Princeton used a state-of-the-art, detailed computer model to look at what might happen if solar geoengineering was used to cut global temperature increases in half. In the scenario, they found that reducing warming would also offset the increasing intensity of hurricanes and would help moderate extreme rain and a lack of water for farming (in the model, rain decreased, but so did evaporation). Less than 0.5% of the world might see increases in impacts from climate change. Thats in contrast to some previous studies that found that this type of geoengineering might benefit some parts of the world while large other areas were harmed. Still, the study is limited, and doesnt look at all of the potential effects.在《大自然气候变化》杂志的一项新的研究中,来自哈佛大学、麻省理工学院和普林斯顿大学的研究人员用于了一种最先进设备的、详尽的计算机模型,来仔细观察如果利用太阳能工程将全球气温下降减为不会再次发生什么。



尽管如此,这项研究是受限的,并没看见所有的潜在影响。The concept of spraying chemicals into the sky to cool the Earth is not new. Its the same process that happens naturally when volcanoes erupt. In 1991, when Mount Pinatubo erupted and spewed millions of tons of sulfur dioxide into the atmosphere, it cooled the planet by half a degree Celsius for more than a year. But its only more recently that researchers have started seriously studying what might happen if humans deliberately do something similar. At this point, its still a very small area of study, with relatively little funding, and many unknowns.向天空倾倒化学物质以加热地球的点子并不新鲜。


在这一点上,这依然是一个十分小的研究领域,资金比较较较少并且不存在许多未知数。Burns emphasizes, repeatedly, that the worlds priority needs to be reducing emissions to zero. Solar geoengineering cannot be a substitute for reducing emissions, because it does not address the root cause of climate change, she says. So if we are to achieve a stable climate, we really do need to reduce emissions to zero, and then also eventually remove the carbon dioxide thats in the atmosphere and store it underground or elsewhere. Those actions actually address the root cause. Solar geoengineering does not.伯恩斯一再强调,世界的首要任务是构建零排放。太阳能工程无法替代排放量,因为它无法解决问题气候变化的根本原因,她说道。因此,如果我们要构建一个平稳的气候,我们显然必须将排放量增加到零,然后最后避免大气中的二氧化碳,并将其储存在地下或其他地方。

这些行动实质上解决问题了问题的显然。太阳能地球工程则不然。It would only potentially be used temporarily while we rapidly reduce our emissions to the atmosphere and figure out cheap ways to separate carbon dioxide out, says Alan Robock, an environmental sciences professor at Princeton. So nobody talks about doing it instead of mitigation. It would be on top of our best efforts at mitigation. Robock has documented 27 potential risks of the idea, from the possibility of ozone depletion to potential droughts and a reduction in solar energy generation. The paper lists only six potential benefits, but one is significant: a reduction in surface air temperatures could reduce or reverse negative impacts of global warming, including floods, droughts, stronger storms, sea ice melting, and sea level rise.普林斯顿大学环境科学教授艾伦·罗博克(Alan Robock)回应:“在我们很快增加对大气的废气,并寻找廉价的方法将二氧化碳分离出来过来的时候,它只有可能被继续用于。



罗伯克记录了这个点子的27个潜在风险,从臭氧损耗的可能性到潜在的旱季和太阳能发电的增加。这篇论文只所列了六个潜在的益处,但其中一个很最重要:地表空气温度的减少可以增加或挽回全球气候变化的负面影响,还包括洪水、旱季、强风暴、海冰融化和海平面下降。At Harvard, the researchers are studying the possibility of using calcium carbonate (the same particle found in chalk or toothpaste) rather than sulfur dioxide; while sulfur dioxide can speed up the destruction of the ozone layer, calcium carbonate could potentially help it and avoid some other risks. While their work is focused in the lab and computer modeling now, the team may be the first to do a real-world experiment, which would involve launching a balloon into the stratosphere, releasing a small amount of calcium carbonate, and then measure how the light scatters and changes in atmospheric chemistry. The team was interested in conducting the experiment this year, but wont move forward without the recommendation of an external, independent advisory committee that its creating. To us, the governance of this is equally as important as the scientific goals for the experiment, says Burns.哈佛大学的研究者们正在研究用于碳酸钙的可能性(就是粉笔和牙膏的颗粒成分)而不是二氧化硫,因为SO2不会加快毁坏臭氧层。而碳酸钙需要避免这种情况同时防止一些其他的风险。