Advertisement

Chaos Control: Climate Stabilization by Closing the Global Carbon Cycle

  • Peter M. EisenbergerEmail author
Chapter
Part of the Studies in Economic Theory book series (ECON.THEORY, volume 29)

Abstract

The central idea behind the control of chaotic systems is that the same feedbacks that destabilize a complex system producing chaotic dynamics can be used to relatively easily stabilize it. While many argue that the carbon cycle feedbacks are destabilizing the climate, it will be argued here that those same feedbacks can stabilize the climate. The controlling variable is the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere and the control strategy is to close the global carbon cycle of our planet, including human and planetary components, so the ambient concentration is fixed. The stabilization using CO2 capture from or release to the atmosphere requires less energy per year than used to stabilize the climate in our buildings and for less cost than 1 % of the global GDP. Closing the carbon cycle by using carbon from the air and hydrogen from water to make our energy sources, thus removing the current negative feedback between our energy use and the planet, enables us to use as much energy as we need. Thus chaos control of our climate transforms the threat of climate change into an opportunity for our species and our planet to flourish in the Anthropocene era.

Keywords

Fossil Fuel Chaotic System Carbon Cycle Global Carbon Cycle Chaos Control 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Notes

Acknowledgements

The author would like to acknowledge many useful discussions over the years with Graciela Chichilnisky, the author of the Carbon Market, on the critical role of CO2. Matthew Realff helped clarify the distinction between the feedback control signal and the feedbacks that actually stabilize the planet. Roger Cohen, a climate skeptic, diligently and patiently critiqued earlier drafts of the paper and helped improve it significantly on the important distinction between correlation and causation. Klaus Lackner provided useful feedback that helped clarify some ambiguity in early formulations of this paper. Others including Wally Broecker, Tim Fox, Chris Jones, Eric Ping, and David Shearer provided useful comments on earlier drafts. The author also wishes to acknowledge that this paper was developed during preparation for a new course at Columbia University for their new program on Carbon Management and that he is also one of the founders, together with Graciela Chichilnisky, of Global Thermostat, a company developing technology to remove CO2 from the air. This paper expands upon an earlier published article (Eisenberger 2013).

References

  1. Archer, et al. (2009). Annual Review Earth Planetary Science 2009. 37, 117–34. First published online as a Review in Advance on January 26, 2009. The Annual Review of Earth and Planetary Sciences at earth.annualreviews.org. Article doi: 10.1146/annurev.earth.031208.100206.
  2. Best, C. (2010) Doubling CO2 and basic physics. Retrieved May 16, 2013. http://clivebest.com/blog/?p=1169.
  3. Boccaletti, S. et al. (2000). Physics Reports, 329, 103–197.Google Scholar
  4. Canadell, J. G., et al. (2007). PNAS, 104, 18866–18870.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Casebow, A. (2008). Evidence of past climate change. La Societe Guernesiaise. Retrieved May 16, 2013. http://www.societe.org.gg/planetguernsey/download/3_Historical.pdf.
  6. Chichilnisky, G., et al. (2009). International Journal Green Economics, 3(3/4), 414–448.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. DiPietro, P. et al. (2012). SPE Economics & Management, pp. 69–74.Google Scholar
  8. Donner, R., et al (2009). European Physics Journal Special Topics, 174, 1–9.Google Scholar
  9. Eastman, A. D., & Muir, M. P. (2013). EGS and the utilization of highly pressurized CO2 for purposes other than power generation. GreenFire Energy. Retrieved May 16, 2013. https://pangea.stanford.edu/ERE/pdf/IGAstandard/SGW/2013/Eastman.pdf.
  10. Eisenberger, P. (2013). Closing the Global Carbon Cycle: Climate Stabilization and Sustainable Carbon Energy, Energy & Environmental Science.Google Scholar
  11. Eisenberger, P., et al. (2009). Environment. Climate Change, Energy Economics and Energy Policy, Issue, 20(6), 973–984.Google Scholar
  12. Foster, G. L., et al. (2013). PNAS, 110(4), 1209–1214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Greenstone, M., & Looney, A. (2012), Paying Too Much For Energy? The True Cost of Our Energy Choices. In CEEPR WP 2012-002. Retrieved May 16, 2013. http://web.mit.edu/ceepr/www/publications/workingpapers/2012-002.pdf.
  14. Hag, B. U. et al. (1987). Science, 235, 1156–1167.Google Scholar
  15. Jones, C. (2011). Annual Review of Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering, 2, 31–52.Google Scholar
  16. Kauffman, S. (1995). At home in the universe: the search for laws of self-organization and complexity, Viking.Google Scholar
  17. Lacis, A. A., et al. (2010). Science, 330(6002), 356–359. doi: 10.1126/science.1190653.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Muller, R. A. et al. (2012). Decadal variations in the global atmospheric land temperatures. Retrieved May 16, 2013. http://berkeleyearth.org/pdf/berkeley-earth-decadal-variations.pdf.
  19. Paladin, G., et al. (1994). Predictability in spatially extended systems. Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and General, 27, 4911. doi: 10.1088/0305-4470/27/14/018.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Rohde, A.R. et al. (2013). Geoinfor. Geostat: An Overview 1. Retrieved May 16, 2013. http://www.scitechnol.com/GIGS/GIGS-1-101.pdf.
  21. Ruddiman, W. F. (2003). Climate Change, 61, 261–293.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Sanders, J. E., & Merguerian, C. (1994b). The glacial geology of New York City and vicinity. In A.I. Benimoff (Ed.), The Geology of Staten Island, New York, Field guide and proceedings, The Geological Association of New Jersey, XI Annual Meeting (pp. 93–200).Google Scholar
  23. Shakun, J. D. (2012). Nature, 484, 49–54. doi: 10.1038/nature10915.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Singh, D. J. et al. (2001). CO2 capture options for an existing coal fired power plant: O2/CO2 recycle combustion vs. Amine scrubbing. Retrieved May 16, 2013. http://www.netl.doe.gov/publications/proceedings/01/carbon_seq/p6.pdf.
  25. Skinner, L. (2012). Science, 337, 917–919. doi: 10.1126/science.1224011.
  26. Vincent, T. L. (2001). Nonlinear Dynamics and Systems Theory, 1(2), 205–218.Google Scholar
  27. Wang, T., et al. (2011). Environmental Science and Technology, 45(15), 6670–6675.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. A Report by the NSF Advisory Committee for Environmental Research and Education. (2009). Transitions and Tipping Points in Complex Environmental Systems. http://www.nsf.gov/geo/ere/ereweb/ac-ere/nsf6895_ere_report_090809.pdf.

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Earth and Environmental SciencesColumbia UniversityPalisadesUSA

Personalised recommendations