by Scientists surprised the leaders of a Northern California city last month, when they unveiled a project to study technology that could one day be used to lighten clouds and mitigate global warming.
The experiment involved spraying salt water on the deck of the USS Hornet – a burning aircraft carrier in Alameda that serves as a museum – to test devices that can create and measure aerosol plumes. The team planned three sprays a day, four days a week for 20 weeks.
The actions themselves were harmless — and, in fact, environmental consultants hired by the city to assess the project found no safety concerns, according to a report published Thursday. But the work represents the first step towards understanding whether this type of technology, at scale, could be used to reflect more sunlight off clouds back into space and mitigate some of the effects of global warming.
This possibility has put the city in the middle of a larger debate about whether and how to explore geoengineering technologies to combat climate change – and who should have a say.
The project, led by a team from the University of Washington, represents one of the first efforts to test promising marine cloud technology in the United States.
Alameda city officials and voters said they only learned the full details after the New York Times published a story in April. The Times said the researchers knew their test could be controversial for some people, so they “kept the details tight”.
After the article was published, city leaders ordered the scientists to stop the project, saying it was violating the lease with the USS Hornet. The Alameda city council will decide the fate of the project at a meeting on June 4.
The idea behind cloud brightening concepts is to increase the number of water droplets within low-level ocean clouds to boost their reflectivity and potentially make the clouds last longer. That process could direct clouds to reflect more sunlight to space. It would not help with other climate problems, such as ocean acidification, and some researchers worry that, at scale, it could alter atmospheric circulation with unintended consequences.
Scientists are far from even testing at that level. On the deck of the aircraft carrier, the researchers were simply using a machine similar to a snowmaker to spray salt water.
“The studies involve brief salt-water emissions that develop into a pumping of tiny salt particles whose number, size and path are measured by instruments installed along the Hornet’s flight deck,” Rob Wood, professor in atmospheric sciences at the University. of Washington and the head of the project, said in a statement.
The researchers planned to study how particles of different sizes affect the flour.
Wood said the studies are “basic science research” and are not “designed to change clouds or any aspect of local weather or climate.”
The safety assessment released on Thursday did not identify any potential injuries from the work.
“We do not see this operation as a health risk to the surrounding community,” consultant and engineer Andrew Romolo wrote in a letter to city leaders. In a separate letter, a biological consultant said the salt plumes would not harm terns (a type of seabird) or any other sensitive species.
Laura Fies, executive director of the USS Hornet Museum, said her initial conversations with the research team focused primarily on immediate plans for the work, rather than its long-term implications. So the controversy that ensued was surprising.
“We were like — we’re doing some sea breeze, that’s cute, that’s fun,” Fies said. “And you know, I fully admit, the exciting, controversial part is like the most newsworthy part. It’s years away from what they’re doing now.”
Fies said the aircraft carrier has hosted events with pyrotechnics and Jeeps driving around the deck.
“We do wilder things on the flight deck all the time,” Fies said. “What’s being sprayed across the deck is salt water, very clean salt water. It didn’t occur to us that the city would want to come and inspect with a Hazmat team.”
Most geoengineering ideas are theoretical and untested. Atmospheric scientists say there is no evidence of any large-scale programs, but scientists are taking baby steps to understand the basic physics and feasibility of some possibilities.
The broad implications of this research scare some people, as certain types of geoengineering concepts could affect weather patterns, create pollution or change the appearance of the sky. Proponents argue that humanity is already geoengineering the Earth’s atmosphere by pumping carbon emissions into the atmosphere, and that the risks of global warming could worsen.
In terms of regulation, geoengineering is a Wild West. Tennessee became the first state to impose a blanket ban on the practice this year. But the legislative debates were marked by outlandish conspiracy theories about so-called “chemtrails,” widespread confusion and inaccurate suggestions that large, federal geoengineering programs were already underway.
In Alameda, Sarah Henry, a city spokeswoman, said the city manager’s office was notified that “the Hornet had a research partner doing work on the Hornet and what they said was a tear down on the flight deck.”
“We didn’t know that the University of Washington was a partner and we didn’t know the details of the research being done and that’s why this has come to this point,” she said.
The research team also includes scientists with SRI International, a nonprofit research institute founded by Stanford University, and SilverLining, a Washington, DC nonprofit focused on climate interventions.
The scientists say they received an external assessment of regulatory and permitting requirements before launching the project.
Josh Horton, a senior fellow at the Harvard Kennedy School who studies the policy of solar geoengineering, said such projects provoke deeper concern and force people to think about the darkest possibilities of climate change.
“The research currently being planned is very small scale and involves no physical environmental risk. It’s about the political symbolism and the uncomfortable questions it raises,” he said.
Horton also questioned why the scientists chose to keep the project quiet until it was in action.
“He defends conspiracy theories. It is alarming that a privileged cast of actors is doing this behind the scenes without public input,” he said.
However, Wood said that public outreach was part of the plan and that the Hornet had been chosen by project leaders to “support engagement with the public and a wide range of stakeholders in a tangible way, through direct access to the research. “
Fies said the museum was working with the researchers on plans for live exhibits for students. She hopes that the city council will approve that work.
“Who doesn’t want to be in the splash?” she said.
This article was originally published on NBCNews.com
