ARC Analysis* of Artificial Trees

The Artificial trees option should be pursued vigorously and urgently, to determine if it is technically viable. Given the key facts of the  report "geo-engineering giving us the time to act?" by The Institution of Mechanical Engineers http://www.imeche.org/NR/rdonlyres/448C8083-F00D-426B-B086-565AA17CB703/0/IMechEGeoengineeringReport.pdf

“Key Facts

• Artificial trees would be several thousand times more effective at removing CO2 compared with natural trees

• Five to ten million ‘trees’ could remove the current global annual non-energy production CO2 emissions

• Leveraging emerging CCS (Carbon Capture and Storage) infrastructure will lead to economies of scale

• Each tree would cost about $20,000.”

Total cost of the trees required to remove the current global annual non-energy production CO2 emissions is estimated at between US$100 billion and US$200 billion. This compares with:

* Global military expenditure in 2008 that is estimated to have totalled US $1,464 billion.

(http://www.sipri.org/yearbook/2009/05).

* During the last quarter of 2008, central banks purchased US$2,000 billion of government debt and troubled private assets from banks. (Wikipedia)

* The global currency market was US$3,200 billion a day in 2007, or US$800,000 billion per annum. A Tobin Tax of 1% would yield US$8,000 billion per year. (Wikipedia)

* About US$20bn per year (US$200bn over 10 years) is paid in bonuses to 'bankers' in the Financial Sector.

The Artificial trees option is certainly financially viable.

* ‘ARC analysis’ involves a comparison of the world’s human and economic resources spent on the Military and armaments with that spent on providing true Human Security. www.arcuk.org

This poster was displayed at the Scientists for Global Responsibility www.sgr.org.uk/ Conference in London, UK on Saturday 24th October 2009. Click here for pdf version.

Websites referred to during the verbal discussions (and a subsequent Google search) include:

1. the  report "geo-engineering giving us the time to act?" by The Institution of Mechanical Engineers http://www.imeche.org/NR/rdonlyres/448C8083-F00D-426B-B086-565AA17CB703/0/IMechEGeoengineeringReport.pdf

2. Climate Change Science Compendium 2009 http://www.unep.org/publications/contents/pub_details_search.asp?ID=4064

3. Carbon dioxide air capture

 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_dioxide_air_capture#Artificial_trees

4. Could mechanical trees save the world? http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/today/tomfeilden/2009/08/_in_order_to_see.html

5. SolarBotanic Signs Deal On Energy Harvesting Artificial Trees

http://www.azocleantech.com/details.asp?newsID=5869

6. Google "artificial trees carbon capture"

7. Carbon capture and storage

http://www.euractiv.com/en/climate-change/carbon-capture-storage/article-157806# http://www.euractiv.com/en/climate-change/artificial-trees-proposed-planet-saviours/article-184929

8.   The Carbon Capture & Storage Association

http://www.ccsassociation.org.uk/

Topics discussed include:

9 Vostok Ice core data

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ice_core

http://www.daviesand.com/Choices/Precautionary_Planning/New_Data/

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Ice-core-isotope.png

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Carbon_Dioxide_400kyr.png

10 UK Chief Scientist warns we must act on climate change now

http://www.abc.net.au/pm/content/2005/s1480886.htm

11 Type I and type II errors

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_I_and_type_II_errors

If a type II error is made on climate change (i.e. scientists are correct that we must act on climate change now, but appropriate action is not taken) then we all die. If a type I error is made (i.e. false alarms, the scientists are wrong but action is taken) then we waste a lot of effort.

12 UNEP Climate Change Strategy

http://www.unep.org/climatechange/Publications/Publication/tabid/429/language/en-US/Default.aspx?BookID=4006

http://www.unep.org/climatechange/