How will we regulate the min and max level of CO2 in the atmosphere with advent of working air CO2 capture?

Question

My company believes that it has the technology of strip massive amounts of carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere. We believe that in time we can reverse climate change by lowering the level of carbon dioxide. (Best case would be 20 years if massive effort was made and Kyoto was modified to allow us to claim carbon credits for the capture.) This raises an interesting question, how low should the level of CO2 be allowed to fall?. Certain countries like those in the Middle East would like a colder world where they would get rain as they did several thousand years ago. Others like Canada would like a warmer world. My question is about how we should decide and how we would enforce it.

Answer 1

curious little problem this: CO2 levels have dropped steadily over the past 4 billion years while temperatures have stayed constant. Why? because the sun has got hotter in that time, and because life has responded to that with an evolved feedback loop that brings CO2 down to keep temperature comfortable.

But - the pre industrial CO2 level was already a little on the low side for many types of plants to respirate. Take too much CO2 out and you compromise tree life (grasses, on the other hand, can hang on longer)

That little weirdness aside, there is no way that a sufficiently clear scientific consensus of the best CO2 level will emerge without another couple of decades' worth of numerical analysis. The maths is just too complex. You have to factor in huge numbers of things, including cloud cover, hurricanes, permafrost, swamp methane, gas hydrates... the list is endless.

But even setting that problem aside, I'd say your company's process will almost certainly be very energy intensive. Rather than do that, I would prefer to replant ancient forests worldwide, and plan for a stabilisation then slow reduction in world population. Even that apparently impossible task would be easier than agreeing on how high to set the carbon hoover.

Nevertheless, full marks for giving a s*&%.

Answer 2

the genuine question is the place the surplus warmth trapped by potential of an ever thickening blanket of greenhouse gases is going. The atmospheric temperatures have risen some distance decrease than the CO2 index might point out...and this confuses a great style of human beings. the quick answer is interior the physics. warmth strikes from heat to relax. It strikes from a miles less dense medium to a extra dense medium. The 'extra dense medium' is ice first and sea water 2nd. vast quantities of ice are actually melting as this medium absorbs the atmospheric warmth. Ocean temperatures are very slowly growing to be besides. good there you have your reason and result. Trapped warmth is the 'reason', melting ice and warming sea water is the 'result'. placed you heat beer cans on your ice chest. The beer cools because of the fact the ice absorbs the warmth power and melts. the reason of the melting ice is the warmth beer and the leakage of warmth air into the container. Any 'scientist' who 'believes' interior the opposite isn't probable a 'scientist'.

Answer 3

Very good news if your company has the technology to strip massive amounts of CO2 from the atmosphere without undesirable side effects. I would suggest that the technology would need to be carefully tested to determine this.

My suggestion would be that the best solution would be to return CO2 levels to pre industrialisation levels on the basis that this was the level before man's activities affected it.