Scientists Want to Terraform The Sahara, The Pricetag: $2 Trillion Per Year - Polidicks

[url]http://www.popsci.com/environment/article/2009-09/scientists-concoct-2-trillion-year-plan-geoengineer-sahara-desert[/url] [quote]Now that scientists agree that humans have profoundly changed the Earth's climate, many have begun asking if we can use our globe-altering power to simply change it back. Geoengineering, essentially terraforming on Earth, has been floated as a cure for global warming a number of times over the past year, but now some scientists have published a plan to transform a part of the Sahara desert into a lush forest, and in the process, absorb enough carbon to offset the world's current fossil fuel use. The catch: it will cost $2 trillion a year, and possibly destroy the Amazon jungle while unleashing giant swarms of locusts across Africa. Writing in next month's issue of the journal Climatic Change, Leonard Ornstein, a cell biologist at the Mount Sinai School of Medicine, and David Rind and Igor Aleinov, researchers at NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies, lay out a plan to pump desalinated seawater from the coast to the desert. The pipes, buried underground to avoid loss to evaporation, would irrigate fields of Eucalyptus grandis. As the trees take root, they will replenish the soil and cause more rainfall, allowing for even more growth. The researchers estimate that as the forest grows, it will fix 8 million tons of atmospheric carbon, equivalent to the total emissions of the planet today. Of course, there might be a few side effects. For one, sand from the Sahara is carried into the air, across the Atlantic, and deposited in South America. The rich dust that falls from the sky, and the rain storms caused by that dust picking up moisture during it's transoceanic journey both fertilize the Amazon rain forest. No desert, no dust. No dust, no rain forest. During that journey, the dust also feeds a variety of sea life. Plus, the rain could cause massive swarms of locusts. Currently, wet years in the Sahara trigger serious population spikes of the destructive insects. With a permanent forest and heavy rain every year, Exodus-level clouds of locusts could spread across the entire continent. And did I mention this would cost $2 trillion a year? There is no doubt that global warming is a clear and present danger, and geoengineering may be part of the solution to that problem. But I think this is one case where I have to agree with the inevitable comments and say this cure sounds worse than the disease. [/quote] Wow

I say do it.

Best idea EVER and by best I mean worst

As long as they don't ask the United States for cash, they should do it

If making the Sahara into a lush forest would destroy sea life, an entire jungle, and annihilate whatever crops the Africans? The Sahara is natural, and should stay there for good reason. I pity those who say it's a good idea. I want to hear you say that when the already tattered economy is further stressed, and more of the ecosystem is destroyed than replenished.

[quote=crazy ass scientists]and possibly destroy the Amazon jungle while unleashing giant swarms of locusts across Africa.[/quote] What.

No this is a bad idea if what I saw on TV is true. The sahara used to be covered by a sea or an ocean, there's plenty of dead bacteria and nutrients, when the winds pick up, the light dust is carried over the atlantic and fertilizes the amazon [B]EDIT:[/B] read the article and it was already covered by it, disregard this post

Why? Just fill the fucking place up with solar panels and provide the whole world electricity.

[QUOTE=Reflectent;17330185]What.[/QUOTE] Read the damn article

[QUOTE=KarlHeinrichMarx;17330202]Why? Just fill the fucking place up with solar panels and provide the whole world electricity.[/QUOTE] That's not a bad idea, locusts will probably fuck it up though, they ruin everything

That's a fucking stupid idea if I've ever seen one.

It would be better if they crammed it with Solar Panels. That can probably generate electricity for a whole country, and if they're willing to spend so much money then why not just do it?

[QUOTE=KarlHeinrichMarx;17330202]Why? Just fill the fucking place up with solar panels and provide the whole world electricity.[/QUOTE] [img]http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/gizmodo/2009/09/solar-panels.jpg[/img] But why do that when we can turn water into oil?

Well, does the water into oil thing recycle back into water? Because I don't want to start eating up critical resources that our planet would utterly fail without.

Maybe they should only do a 100 miles or so of it, this could help advance our terraforming technology so we can use it in space one day.

[QUOTE=Dr.C;17330235]That's not a bad idea, locusts will probably fuck it up though, they ruin everything[/QUOTE] This man speaks the truth. I lost my wife and my job because of those damn locusts.

[QUOTE=The Epidemic;17330396]Well, does the water into oil thing recycle back into water? Because I don't want to start eating up critical resources that our planet would utterly fail without.[/QUOTE] It would go into the atmosphere, where we would have to collect it and physically turn it back into water, extremely pure water.

What could possibly go wrong?

I have no objections to this.

[QUOTE=RichardNixon;17330425]It would go into the atmosphere, where we would have to collect it and physically turn it back into water, extremely pure water.[/QUOTE] No, that would suck dick. As much water as we have, it isn't infinite and we'd just be fucking up the reason we're all alive on the planet.

How could they just change it though it seems like a disaster waiting to happen

Think of all the jobs it would create.

Why can't environmentalists take nature for what it is? They actually [b]oppose[/b] change.

[QUOTE=RichardNixon;17330540]Think of all the jobs it would create.[/QUOTE] But it's just so dangerous. It could end man-kind!

do it

Scientists probably know better than us do it

Where will we shoot the next Mad Max movie? [editline]10:35PM[/editline] I object to this

[QUOTE=Lankist;17330744]Where will we shoot the next Mad Max movie? [editline]10:35PM[/editline] I object to this[/QUOTE] Australia.

[quote=guys]Of course, there might be a few side effects. For one, sand from the Sahara is carried into the air, across the Atlantic, and deposited in South America. The rich dust that falls from the sky, and the rain storms caused by that dust picking up moisture during it's transoceanic journey both fertilize the Amazon rain forest. No desert, no dust. No dust, no rain forest. During that journey, the dust also feeds a variety of sea life. Plus, the rain could cause massive swarms of locusts. Currently, wet years in the Sahara trigger serious population spikes of the destructive insects. With a permanent forest and heavy rain every year, Exodus-level clouds of locusts could spread across the entire continent.[/quote] Seems like a good idea.

Or we could replace the areas we destroyed ourselves.