文章 Articles

地球工程:硫是救星

把硫注入大气有助于地球降温吗?抑或是个危险的歪点子?

Article image

什么意思?

通过将部分阳光反射回太空,气溶胶从而减少阳光到达地球表面的数量。该计划的支持者们称,将硫注入平流层将制造人工气溶胶,将使地球冷却,快速而廉价。

如何实现?

用气球、飞机甚至大炮,把所谓的“前驱气体”发射到平流层,产生二氧化硫,进而与水结合,附着在固体粒子上,形成悬浮微粒。

这是模仿火山爆发的自然过程。1991年,菲律宾品纳土玻火山爆发,将1千万吨硫送入大气层。科学家们称,在随后的两年里,全球气温下降了0.6摄氏度。诺贝尔奖得主、臭氧科学家保罗·克鲁岑是这一主张的主要倡导者,并建议使用火箭将硫注入大气层。

有何风险?

和多数地球工程计划一样,这一计划存在诸多尚无答案的问题。政府间气候变化专门委员会在其最近的报告中称:“有关悬浮微粒辐射力的不确定性依然很大。”在过去,低层大气中硫的增加,导致了酸雨和呼吸疾病的增加,而把硫注入高层大气的副作用则可能包括臭氧损耗。

此计划还有可能使不可预测的天气增加:一些科学家推测,在高层大气大范围悬浮微粒的形成,可能导致亚洲和非洲季风反常,对两大洲人们的生计产生破坏性后果。

我们的评判

用大炮拯救地球可能听起来难以置信,但是悬浮微粒的形成实际上是可信度更高而成本更低的地球工程计划之一。然而,相关的风险依然很大。显然,只有在气候形势异常紧迫的情况下,我们才需要认真考虑减少地球的日照。


下一篇:改造海洋

 
首页图片由 ggourde

发表评论 Post a comment

评论通过管理员审核后翻译成中文或英文。 最大字符 1200。

Comments are translated into either Chinese or English after being moderated. Maximum characters 1200.

评论 comments

Default avatar
匿名 | Anonymous

火山爆发

文中举了菲律宾火山爆发的例子,称其使全球气温下降了0.6度。但科学家对此事例的解释非常简略,缺乏详细的文字说明,并不能很好地说服普通的读者。

Volcanic eruption

The article cited the example of volcanic eruption in the Philippines, claiming that it caused a 0.6 degree drop for the global temperature. Yet, scientists' explanation on this is rather brief without any detailed description. It is thus not convincing to the general readers.

The comment was translated by Hebing

Default avatar
匿名 | Anonymous

警惕副作用

我不是专家,虽然听上去硫能有效的降温,但科学家们是否准确预估了这么做的副作用?

在我看来,任何人为改变自然环境的做法都是有危险的,无论是温室气体的增加导致的全球变暖,还是现在畅想给大气注入硫。

打个未必恰当的比方,炒一锅菜,出锅前发现盐加多了过咸,于是撒了一把糖,企图掩盖盐味,难道味道就正了吗???

何况地球工程系列背后涉及多么巨大的资金和技术投入,一招错棋,是经济、环境和人类无可估量的损失。不过我仍然很喜欢这个系列的文章,敢想才让一切有了可能性。

Watch out for the side-effects

I do not claim to be an expert in this field. It seems that sulphur can help cool the earth effectively. However, have scientists been able to accurately predict the side-effects? I feel that any attempts to change the natural environment do carry risks, ranging from global warming caused by an increase in greenhouse gas emissions, to the release of sulphur into the atmosphere. It is like adding more sugar to a dish in order to balance the overly added salt. Can the dish taste perfect by simply covering up the saltiness? Geoengineering projects often require huge investments and technology. A misstep will lead to immeasurable losses to the economy, environment and human beings. But I still like this series of articles. Only bold imagination can make things possible. - This comment is translated by Jo

Default avatar
匿名 | Anonymous

研究参考

回应第一位评论者 - 美国太空总署一项有关研究,参考资料请看(英文版): http://www.giss.nasa.gov/research/briefs/hansen_02/

Reference for research

Commenter no: 1 - A reference for NASA research on the topic can be found here - http://www.giss.nasa.gov/research/briefs/hansen_02/ In English.

Default avatar
匿名 | Anonymous

无稽之谈

救了气候,那土壤怎么办?全世界几十亿人的口粮怎么办?

A groundless utterance

When climate is saved, then what shall be done to the earth? How about the food for several billion people in the world?

Default avatar
匿名 | Anonymous

最典型一元化思维的最滑稽结论

从何时起,二氧化碳成了唯一影响地球环境的因子?尽管我并不反对预测其给地球带来的毁灭性结果的科学性,更不反对为避免这样的情况发生所作的一切努力,但是我们要看到,在我们所生活着的,还能看得见摸得着的几十年里,有太多的因素以更直接的方式威胁着人类的生存。比如中国还在和酸雨作斗争,比如中国的城市中,仅有10%不到能达到WHO的空气质量标准,其中最主要的超标物就是细颗粒。
文中提到的解决气後变暖的方法,也许因为平流层和对流层的区别不会造成直接污染,但是如果这样可以救人类,中国作为最大的二氧化硫排放国则应该成为地球环境安全最大的贡献者。但是显然,目前中国因为温室气体排放增长所受到的指责,没有因为我们同时是最大的二氧化硫排放国而得到任何的同情。

The most ridiculous conclusion drawn by a typical monistic mindset

Since when has CO2 become the only factor of damaging the environment? I don't deny the scientific ground of the prediction that CO2 will be disastrous to the Earth. I don't oppose to all the efforts made to avoid such a situation. Yet, we should see that there are far more factors more directly threatening lives of humans in the foreseeable decades to come. Such as the struggle with acid rain in China, and less than 10% Chinese cities meeting the air quality standards established by the WHO, in which fine particles are the major pollutants exceeding the regulated standards.

The methods of tackling climate change as mentioned in this article may not lead to direct pollution due to the differences between the stratosphere and the troposphere. Yet, if it can help saving the mankind, then China, being the biggest SO2 emission country, will probably become the greatest contributor of environmental security. However, while China is being blamed for its increased greenhouse gas emissions, it does not receive any sympathy for being the biggest emitter of SO2.

Translated by Ming Li

Default avatar
匿名 | Anonymous

Aerosols应该翻译成“气溶胶”而不是“喷雾剂”

Aerosols应该翻译成“气溶胶”而不是“喷雾剂”。这是个专业术语,非专业人士难免译错。

《气候变化研究进展》编辑

The translation for "Aerosols" should be “气溶胶” instead of “喷雾剂”

The translation for "Aerosols" should be “气溶胶” instead of “喷雾剂”. This is a jargon, meaning it is easy for people outside the profession to name it wrongly. - Editor, Advances in Climate Change Research

Default avatar
匿名 | Anonymous

谢谢指正

谢谢评论6指正我们翻译上的错误,已改正。

Shanshan
chinadialogue

Thank you for pointing out the translation mistake

Thank you commenter 6 for pointing out the translation mistake. Amendments have been made accordingly. - Shanshan chinadialogue