Practicality of stratospheric geoengineering...
Transcript of Practicality of stratospheric geoengineering...
GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH LETTERS, VOL. ???, XXXX, DOI:10.1029/,
Practicality of stratospheric geoengineering with1
black carbon aerosols2
Ben Kravitz1
and Alan Robock2
Ben Kravitz, Department of Global Ecology, Carnegie Institution for Science, 260 Panama
Street, Stanford, CA 94305, USA. ([email protected]) (Corresponding Author)
Alan Robock, Department of Environmental Sciences, Rutgers University, 14 College Farm
Road, New Brunswick, NJ 08901, USA. ([email protected])
1Department of Global Ecology, Carnegie
Institution for Science, Stanford, California,
USA.
2Department of Environmental Sciences,
Rutgers University, New Brunswick, New
Jersey, USA.
D R A F T August 21, 2011, 8:52am D R A F T
X - 2 KRAVITZ ET AL.: BC GEOENGINEERING PRACTICALITY
We calculate costs and emissions factors for two methods of producing 13
Tg per year of black carbon aerosols in the stratosphere as a means of geo-4
engineering the climate. The cheapest investigated idea of combusting diesel5
fuel in the stratosphere to produce the aerosols would require an initial in-6
vestment of US $1.4 trillion and would incur an annual operating cost of ap-7
proximately US $540 billion, or 2.0% and 0.8% of worldwide GDP, respec-8
tively. Costs are reduced by 1-2 orders of magnitude if the aerosols are pro-9
duced on the ground and transported to the stratosphere. Using carbon black10
would be much cheaper, with both fixed and annual costs of approximately11
US $1 billion. Additional emissions dependent upon the means of produc-12
tion and transport would mostly be negligible, with the exception of large13
amounts of NOx from diesel combustion. The amount of NOx produced could14
cause catalytic ozone destruction by approximately 3-10%. The current world-15
wide oil production and refining capacity cannot support diesel fuel combus-16
tion to produce 1 Tg of black carbon aerosols, but producing this much car-17
bon black would be cheap and relatively easy with current technology. The18
cost of using black carbon for stratospheric geoengineering may not be a lim-19
iting factor, but there are other reasons why this technique is impractical,20
including massive ozone depletion.21
D R A F T August 21, 2011, 8:52am D R A F T
KRAVITZ ET AL.: BC GEOENGINEERING PRACTICALITY X - 3
1. Introduction
Stratospheric geoengineering with black carbon (BC) aerosols has been proposed as a22
potential means of alleviating some amount of anthropogenic warming [Crutzen, 2006;23
Kravitz et al., 2011]. Should this be deemed a viable geoengineering option, one of the24
most immediate questions is how one can produce a large amount of black carbon aerosols25
in the stratosphere. We adapt some of the methods and calculations of Robock et al. [2009],26
who performed similar investigations for sulfate aerosols.27
We look at two methods of BC aerosol production: diesel combustion and carbon black.28
Soot production is a particularly sensitive marker of diesel exhaust [Fruin et al., 2004].29
Diesel combustion has the significant advantage of a vast infrastructure currently in place,30
including transportation and regulation, which would lend this technology particularly31
well to geoengineering purposes. Carbon black results from furnace combustion of heavy32
fuel oil in low oxygen [Crump, 2000]. It is generally an agglomeration of mostly elemental33
carbon particles, whereas black carbon aerosols often have adsorbed organic particles, de-34
pending upon the source of the emission [Watson and Valberg , 2001], but the mechanisms35
of formation of the two compounds are quite similar [Medalia et al., 1983], so we can36
assume the particle density and refractive indices are similar. However, a typical radius37
of black carbon aerosol is approximately 0.1 µm [Rose et al., 2006], but a typical carbon38
black agglomerate can have a diameter on the order of millimeters [Gandhi , 2005]. A39
larger diameter means a greatly increased fall speed as well as a reduced radiative effi-40
ciency, so the same mass of carbon black might be significantly less effective, or possibly41
ineffective, for geoengineering.42
D R A F T August 21, 2011, 8:52am D R A F T
X - 4 KRAVITZ ET AL.: BC GEOENGINEERING PRACTICALITY
2. Logistics and costs of using diesel fuel
The black carbon emissions for heavy-duty diesel vehicles are approximately 1 g black43
carbon emitted per kg of fuel used [Kirchstetter et al., 1999], but the highest emitting 10%44
of all heavy-duty diesel trucks produce 42% of black carbon emissions [Ban-Weiss et al.,45
2009]. Assuming diesel engines could be tuned to produce 10 g black carbon per kg of fuel,46
the largest value reported by Ban-Weiss et al. [2009], and assuming an average density47
of 0.84 kg L−1 of diesel fuel [Brown, 1999], producing 1 Tg of black carbon would require48
combustion of 1.19 × 1011 L of diesel fuel, or approximately 10.8% of current worldwide49
production [EIA, 2010a]. Refineries in the United States are operating at approximately50
90% capacity [EIA, 2010b], so extrapolating this value worldwide implies geoengineering51
by combustion of diesel would require additional expansion of the current refining capacity,52
especially since this capacity is likely a theoretical maximum. We do not have estimates of53
cost for this expansion. We assume the cost of obtaining the oil, refining it into diesel, and54
transporting it to its desired destination, which would be the geoengineering deployment55
site, is included in the at-the-pump fuel cost. For each US $0.01 increase in the market56
price of diesel fuel, the annual cost of geoengineering increases by US $314 million.57
Industrial diesel engines are designed to run continuously at 100% capacity and need58
to be maintained relatively infrequently [USP&E , 2010]. As the central model for our59
calculations, we use specifications of the Caterpillar 3516B industrial engine [Caterpillar ,60
2010a]. Average costs for this particular engine are not available, but several auctions61
reported the sold price at US $395,000 (used), which we adopt as our price estimate.62
Assuming the engine is in operation for 2920 hours a year (365 days a year, 8 hours per63
D R A F T August 21, 2011, 8:52am D R A F T
KRAVITZ ET AL.: BC GEOENGINEERING PRACTICALITY X - 5
day - the case for 24 hour per day operation is discussed in Table 1), this would require64
75,100 engines at a capital cost of approximately US $30 billion. We do not include65
estimates of the cost of replacing the engines when they reach the end of their operational66
lifetime, but average diesel engine lifespans are in the range of 10-22 years [MacKay &67
Co., 2003; Lyon, 2007].68
The maintenance costs are twofold: actual cost to maintain the engine and replacement69
engines to operate during the equipment’s downtime. Maintenance requirements for the70
Caterpillar 3516B mean each engine will be inoperative 3.4% of the time [Caterpillar ,71
2010c]. To meet the required black carbon production rate, an additional 255 engines are72
required at a capital cost of US $100 million.73
Maintenance estimates for the Caterpillar G3520 industrial gas engine are approximately74
US $0.008 per kW-h, which is likely more expensive than maintaining a diesel engine75
[USP&E , 2010]. Using this as an upper bound, given that the 3516B runs at a maximum76
of 1492 kW of power generation [Caterpillar , 2010a], the total annual maintenance cost77
is US $2.6 billion.78
A natural solution for getting the black carbon aerosols to the stratosphere is to place79
these diesel engines and diesel fuel in the cargo hold of airplanes and fly them to the80
stratosphere. Robock et al. [2009] evaluated several choices of aircraft that would be81
suitable for geoengineering (their cost estimates were similar to those of McClellan et al.82
[2010]), but we base our calculations here on the KC-10 Extender [USAF , 2010a]. It has83
a payload of 76,560 kg, a ceiling of 12.7 km, and a unit purchase price (2010 dollars) of84
US $116 million. This maximum altitude is only suitable for reaching the stratosphere at85
D R A F T August 21, 2011, 8:52am D R A F T
X - 6 KRAVITZ ET AL.: BC GEOENGINEERING PRACTICALITY
high latitudes, but because the aerosols self-loft, getting them to the upper troposphere86
is sufficient, resulting in rain-out of about 20% [Mills et al., 2008; Robock et al., 2007;87
Fromm et al., 2010].88
Each airplane is capable of carrying more than one engine, so we decompose our cal-89
culations into units consisting of an engine and 8 hours of diesel fuel. The 3516B engine90
weighs up to 8028 kg and can consume 4339.12 L of fuel in 8 hours for a total unit weight91
of 11,977.0 kg [Caterpillar , 2010b]. Each KC-10 Extender can hold 6 units per airplane,92
meaning 12,342 airplanes would be required at a total purchase price of US $1.4 trillion.93
Curtin [2003] gives an estimate of US $3.7 million in annual cost, based on 300 flying94
hours per year, for personnel, fuel, maintenance, modifications, and spare parts for the95
KC-135 airplane. As Robock et al. [2009] state, the KC-10 is a newer airplane and would96
likely be cheaper, so we use this value as an upper limit for our estimations. Scaling these97
maintenance costs, annual maintenance and personnel costs will be approximately US $3698
million per plane, for a total annual operating cost of approximately US $450 billion.99
This combination results in a fixed cost of US $1.4 trillion and an operating cost of100
approximately US $540 billion. This is the cheapest of the methods shown in Table 1,101
which include calculations for the Caterpillar 3406C engine [Caterpillar , 2010a], the KC-102
135 Stratotanker airplane [USAF , 2010b], and geoengineering in three 8-hour shifts per103
day instead of a single shift.104
The world gross domestic product (purchasing power parity) in 2009 was US $69.98105
trillion [CIA, 2010]. The initial investment for geoengineering would be 2.0% of worldwide106
GDP, with an additional 0.8% each year. Stern [2006] states the cost of climate change for107
D R A F T August 21, 2011, 8:52am D R A F T
KRAVITZ ET AL.: BC GEOENGINEERING PRACTICALITY X - 7
2-3◦C of warming could be a permanent loss of up to 3% of GDP, so geoengineering with108
black carbon aerosols is slightly cheaper than the damage that would be caused by climate109
change and is vastly more expensive than geoengineering with sulfate aerosols [Robock et110
al., 2009]. IPCC [2007] calculates that mitigation to reach a stabilization of 535-590 ppm111
CO2-eq would result in a GDP reduction by 0.2-2.5%, with a median reduction of 0.6%112
and an annual reduction of GDP growth rate by less than 0.1%. Compared to the cost of113
black carbon geoengineering by diesel fuel combustion, mitigation either costs the same114
or is cheaper by as much as an order of magnitude.115
The largest source of cost in this method is using airplanes to fly the diesel fuel and116
engines up to the stratosphere. If the black carbon aerosols were produced on the ground,117
collected, and then flown into the stratosphere to be dispersed, the fixed costs could be118
reduced to about US $31 billion, and the annual costs could be reduced to about US $97119
billion [Robock et al., 2009].120
Thus far we have not considered the potential benefit of generation of a large amount of121
electricity from diesel fuel combustion. Using the Caterpillar 3516B engine would create122
approximately 330 TW-h of energy per Tg of BC aerosols produced, which could possibly123
be used to power the airplanes, reducing the associated costs and resources of operating124
the fleet. For comparison, in 2008, the worldwide energy consumption was approximately125
132,000 TW-h [British Petroleum, 2009].126
3. Logistics and costs of using carbon black
Carbon black feedstock is produced from fractional distillation of petroleum and is127
generally extracted as a heavy or residual fuel oil [Dow , 2010a, b; ICBA, 2004]. The128
D R A F T August 21, 2011, 8:52am D R A F T
X - 8 KRAVITZ ET AL.: BC GEOENGINEERING PRACTICALITY
yield of carbon black from the oil furnace process is 35-65%, depending upon the chosen129
feedstock and the desired particle size, with smaller particles resulting in lower yields130
[EPA, 1995]. Small particles are more efficient for geoengineering, so we use the lowest131
value in this range. Assuming an average density of carbon black feedstock of 1.08 kg L−1132
[Dow , 2010b] and that suitable feedstock (residual fuel oil) comprises approximately 8%133
of refinery yields [EIA, 2010b], producing 1 Tg of carbon black will require 3.18× 1010 L134
of oil, or an additional 0.8% of current worldwide production [EIA, 2010b].135
Available furnace black production capacity in the United States (1998) is 1.6 × 109136
kg, more than sufficient to produce 1 Tg [Crump, 2000]. Annual production costs for all137
carbon black produced in the United States (1998) was US $625 million, or approximately138
US $0.33 per kg, with the finest grade having a 1998 cost of approximately US $1.03 per139
kg. Therefore, using current infrastructure, producing 1 Tg of carbon black would cost140
approximately US $1 billion.141
The costs of ferrying 1 Tg of carbon black to the stratosphere are similar to those142
reported in Robock et al. [2009]. The cheapest transportation option has fixed costs of US143
$1 billion and annual costs of about US $320 million. Including the cost of manufacturing144
the carbon black, the total per-Tg cost of geoengineering with carbon black is US $1145
billion fixed and US $1.3 billion annually. We do not include the cost of transporting the146
carbon black to the geoengineering site in these estimates.147
4. Emissions factors
Table 2 summarizes the various emission factors for the most abundant products of148
aerosol production, some of which we examine in more detail.149
D R A F T August 21, 2011, 8:52am D R A F T
KRAVITZ ET AL.: BC GEOENGINEERING PRACTICALITY X - 9
Carbon dioxide, the chief contributor to climate change, is the largest emissions factor150
in Table 2 [IPCC , 2007]. The total worldwide emissions of CO2 are approximately 30 Pg151
of CO2 per year [IEA, 2010], so this would constitute an additional 1.1% of emissions.152
The additional CO2 produced from jet fuel combustion as part of the geoengineering153
process would be less than 1% of current aviation emissions, which are already only 2-3%154
of current worldwide emissions [Enviro Aero, 2009].155
Diesel combustion produces NOx from high temperature dissociation of ambient nitro-156
gen [EPA, 1996]. Creating 1 Tg of black carbon aerosols from diesel combustion would157
produce 8.5×109 kg of NOx. Total worldwide NO emissions in 1990 were 49.6 Tg [Steven-158
son et al., 2004], so this source of NOx would be an additional 17%. NOx is an effective159
catalyst for destruction of stratospheric ozone [Crutzen, 1970]. This mechanism competes160
with reactions between other species, depending upon altitude [Finlayson-Pitts and Pitts ,161
2000]. Based on an experiment by Stolarski et al. [1995] simulating ozone destruction from162
a stratospheric fleet of high speed civil transport aircraft and extrapolating from a linear163
fit to their results, we roughly estimate that combustion of diesel fuel for geoengineering164
could cause a -10 to -3% change in total ozone column due to NOx alone.165
CO is by far the predominant emissions factor of carbon black manufacturing, although166
the CO emissions can be reduced by up to 99.8 percent by controlling with CO boilers,167
incinerators, or flares [EPA, 1995]. Without these controls, producing 1 Tg of carbon168
black would result in the emission of 1.4× 106 kg of CO. Diesel combustion would result169
in a larger amount of 1.8×109 kg of CO. Carbon monoxide is naturally produced at a rate170
of 5× 1012 kg annually in the troposphere [Weinstock and Niki , 1972], so the additional171
D R A F T August 21, 2011, 8:52am D R A F T
X - 10 KRAVITZ ET AL.: BC GEOENGINEERING PRACTICALITY
CO from producing this large amount of aerosols would be negligible. The stratosphere is172
a natural sink for carbon monoxide, due to reaction with the hydroxyl radical [Pressman173
and Warneck , 1970], so we anticipate this emissions factor would not cause any noticeable174
adverse effects.175
Sulfur compounds resulting from diesel fuel combustion are due to sulfur content of the176
fuel. During the combustion process, nearly all of the sulfur is oxidized to SO2, which is177
a precursor to sulfate aerosols [EPA, 1996]. Using the emissions factor given in Table 2,178
creating 1 Tg of black carbon aerosols would result in the production of approximately179
0.57 Tg of SO2, which would cause small climate effects but would still significantly impact180
the planetary radiation budget [Robock et al., 2008; Kravitz and Robock , 2011; Solomon181
et al., 2011]. It is an insufficient amount to produce damaging acid rain [Kravitz et al.,182
2009]. Since the reporting of the year 1996 emissions factors given in Table 2, ultra-low183
sulfur diesel has been introduced to the market and is the only readily available diesel184
fuel in the United States [EPA, 2009], so this emissions factor would likely be lower than185
the values reported here. The chemistry effects of this increase in SOx may not be trivial,186
especially when considering the effects on ozone. Simulations of 2 Tg a−1 injections of S187
into the stratosphere showed a delay in the recovery of the ozone hole by approximately 30188
years [Tilmes et al., 2009], suggesting the additional SOx from our diesel fuel combustion189
calculations has the potential to cause ozone destruction.190
Methane is a powerful greenhouse gas, 23 times more effective than CO2 on a 100-191
year time scale [IPCC , 2007]. From the emissions factor reported in Table 2, producing192
1 Tg of carbon black would result in the production of 2.5 × 104 kg of methane, or193
D R A F T August 21, 2011, 8:52am D R A F T
KRAVITZ ET AL.: BC GEOENGINEERING PRACTICALITY X - 11
an increase in atmospheric concentrations by significantly less than 1 part per trillion.194
Current concentrations of methane are on the order of 1 ppm [IPCC , 2007], so this is a195
negligible contribution.196
5. Discussion and Conclusions
A comparison of all of the discussed means of geoengineering, as well as the calculations197
for SO2 performed by Robock et al. [2009] are in Figure 1. Based on our calculations, if198
black carbon aerosols were to be used for geoengineering, producing 1 Tg of aerosols via in199
situ diesel combustion would be prohibitively expensive and potentially greater than the200
cost of mitigation, which would actually directly address the problem of anthropogenic201
climate change. Producing the aerosols on the ground and transporting them to the202
stratosphere would be much cheaper.203
This study does not address side effects of black carbon geoengineering. The climate204
effects would likely be adverse and severe [Kravitz et al., 2011]. Moreover, diesel fuel,205
black carbon aerosols, carbon black, and their respective byproducts of manufacture and206
combustion are hazardous to human health [CDC , 1999; Baan et al., 2006]. This poses207
a risk to all those in the employ of the geoengineering program, as well as those affected208
by deposition of the particulate matter. In combustion of diesel fuel, a small portion of209
the emissions (2-3%) are through the crankcase instead of the exhaust, which could pose210
a hazard to the airplane pilots and the maintenance crews [EPA, 1996]. Despite these211
unknowns and negative impacts, most emissions factors from black carbon geoengineering212
would be negligible from a climate impact standpoint, although the chemical effects would213
need to be evaluated.214
D R A F T August 21, 2011, 8:52am D R A F T
X - 12 KRAVITZ ET AL.: BC GEOENGINEERING PRACTICALITY
The calculations presented here are one aspect of many that should be carefully eval-215
uated. Geoengineering is a complex problem with multiple facets, all of which must be216
considered before society decides whether to geoengineer.217
Acknowledgments. We thank Barbara Turpin, Ken Caldeira, Drew Shindell, Mark218
Miller, and Anthony Broccoli for comments. This work is supported by NSF grant ATM-219
070452.220
References
Baan, R., K. Straif, Y. Grosse, B. Secretan, F. El Ghissassi, and V. Cogliano (2006),221
Carcinogenicity of carbon black, titanium dioxide, and talc, The Lancet Oncology, 7 (4),222
295-296, doi:10.1016/S1470-2045(06)70651-9.223
Ban-Weiss, G. A., M. M. Lunden, T. W. Kirchstetter, and R. A. Harley (2009), Mea-224
surement of black carbon particle number emission factors from individual heavy-duty225
trucks, Env. Sci. Tech., 43 (5), 1419-1424, doi:10.1021/es8021039.226
British Petroleum (2009), BP statistical review of world energy June 2009, available online227
at http://www.bp.com/statisticalreview.228
T. W. Brown Oil Co., Inc. (1999), Material safety data sheet for #2 diesel, 2 pp., available229
online at http://www.mjmmasonry.com/safety/ dieselfuelmsds.pdf.230
Caterpillar (2010a), Caterpillar industrial wizard, available online at http:// industrial-231
wizard.catmms.com/catwizards/industrialWizard/jsp/ caterpillar.jsp.232
Caterpillar (2010b), Caterpillar marine and power systems, available online at233
http://marine.cat.com/cat-3516B.234
D R A F T August 21, 2011, 8:52am D R A F T
KRAVITZ ET AL.: BC GEOENGINEERING PRACTICALITY X - 13
Caterpillar (2010c), Caterpillar product operation and maintenance manuals (OMMS),235
available online at http://safety.cat.com/cda/layout? m=133362&x=7.236
CDC (1999), Elemental carbon (diesel particulate): Method 5040, Issue 3 (Interim),237
National Institute for Safety and Health, Centers for Disease Control and Preven-238
tion, In NIOSH Manual of Analytical Methods, 4th rev. ed., 5 pp., available online239
at http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/docs/2003-154/pdfs/ 5040f3.pdf.240
CIA (2010), The world factbook: World, Central Intelligence Agency, available online at241
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/ geos/xx.html.242
Crump, E. L. (2000), Economic Impact Analysis For the Proposed Carbon Black Man-243
ufacturing NESHAP, Environmental Protection Agency, EPA-452/D-00-003, 16 pp.,244
available online at http://www.epa.gov/ttnecas1/regdata/ EIAs/carbonblackeia.pdf.245
Crutzen, P. J. (1970), The influence of nitrogen oxides on the atmospheric ozone content,246
Q. J. Roy. Met. Soc., 96 (408), 320-325, doi:10.1002/qj.49709640815.247
Crutzen, P. J. (2006), Albedo enhancement by stratospheric sulfur injections: A contri-248
bution to resolve a policy dilemma? Climatic Change, 77, 211-219, doi:10.1007/s10584-249
006-9101-y.250
Curtin, N. P. (2003), Information on Air Force serial refueling tankers, testimony before251
the Subcommittee on Projection Forces, Committee on Armed Services, House of Repre-252
sentatives, Rep. GAO-03-938T, 8 pp., Gov. Account. Off., Washington, D.C., available253
online at http://www.gao.gov/new.items/ d03938t.pdf.254
Dow (2010a), Carbon black feed safety data sheet, Dow Chemical Com-255
pany, 8 pp., available online at http://www.dow.com/PublishedLiterature/256
D R A F T August 21, 2011, 8:52am D R A F T
X - 14 KRAVITZ ET AL.: BC GEOENGINEERING PRACTICALITY
dh 03df/0901b803803df6d8.pdf.257
Dow (2010b), Carbon black feedstock product safety assessment, Dow Chemi-258
cal Company, 6 pp., available online at http://www.dow.com/ PublishedLitera-259
ture/dh 0538/0901b80380538c53.pdf.260
EIA (2010a), Global oil consumption, U.S. Energy Information Administra-261
tion, available online at http://www.eia.doe.gov/pub/oil gas/petroleum/ analy-262
sis publications/oil market basics/demand text.htm.263
EIA (2010b), U.S. refining capacity, U.S. Energy Information Administra-264
tion, available online at http://www.eia.doe.gov/pub/oil gas/petroleum/ analy-265
sis publications/oil market basics/refining text.htm#U.S. Refining Capacity.266
Enviro Aero (2009), Beginners Guide to Aviation Biofuels, available online at267
http://www.enviro.aero/biofuels.268
EPA (1995), Carbon black, Chapter 6: Organic Chemical Process Industry, Compilation of269
Air Pollutant Emission Factors, EPA AP 42, Fifth Edition, Volume I, 10 pp., available270
online at http://www.epa.gov/ttnchie1/ap42/ ch06/final/c06s01.pdf.271
EPA (1996), Emissions Factors & AP 42, Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission272
Factors, Environmental Protection Agency, EPA AP-42, 9 pp., available online at273
http://www.epa.gov/ttnchie1/ap42/ch03/final/c03s03.pdf.274
EPA (2005), Average carbon dioxide emissions resulting from gasoline and diesel fuel, U.S.275
Environmental Protection Agency Office of Transportation and Air Quality, EPA 420-276
F-05-001, 3pp., available online at http://www.epa.gov/ oms/climate/420f05001.pdf.277
D R A F T August 21, 2011, 8:52am D R A F T
KRAVITZ ET AL.: BC GEOENGINEERING PRACTICALITY X - 15
EPA (2009), Heavy-duty highway diesel program, Environmental Protection Agency,278
available online at http://www.epa.gov/otaq/highway-diesel/ index.htm.279
Finlayson-Pitts, B. J. and J. N. Pitts, Jr. (2000), Chemistry of the Upper and Lower Atmo-280
sphere: Theory, Experiments, and Applications, Academic Press, San Diego, California,281
969 pp.282
Fromm, M., et al. (2010), The untold story of pyrocumulonimbus, Bull. Amerc. Meteor.283
Soc., 91, 1193-1209, doi:10.1175/2010BAMS3004.1.284
Fruin, S. A., A. M. Winer, and C. E. Rodes (2004), Black carbon concentrations in Cali-285
fornia vehicles and estimation of in-vehicle diesel exhaust particulate matter exposures,286
Atm. Env., 38, 4123-4133, doi:10.1016/ j.atmosenv.2004.04.026.287
Gandhi, B. (2005), Reassessment of one Exemption from the Requirement288
of a Tolerance for Carbon Black, Environmental Protection Agency, In-289
ert Ingredient Assessment Branch, 9 pp., available online at http://290
www.epa.gov/opprd001/inerts/carbonblack.pdf.291
ICBA (2004), Carbon black users guide: Safety, health, and environmental information,292
International Carbon Black Association, 11 pp., available online at http://www.carbon-293
black.org/carbonblackuserguide.pdf.294
IEA (2010), CO2 Emissions from Fuel Combustion, International Energy Agency, 130 pp.,295
available online at http://www.iea.org/co2highlights/ CO2highlights.pdf.296
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) (2007), Climate Change 2007: the297
Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Cam-298
bridge University Press, UK, 996 pp.299
D R A F T August 21, 2011, 8:52am D R A F T
X - 16 KRAVITZ ET AL.: BC GEOENGINEERING PRACTICALITY
Kirchstetter, T. W., R. A. Harley, N. M. Kreisberg, M. R. Stolzenburg, and S. V. Her-300
ing (1999), On-road measurement of fine particle and nitrogen oxide emissions from301
light and heavy duty motor vehicles, Atm. Env., 33 (18), 2955-2968, doi:10.1016/S1352-302
2310(99)00089-8.303
Kravitz, B., A. Robock, L. Oman, G. Stenchikov, and A. B. Marquardt (2009), Sulfuric304
acid deposition from stratospheric geoengineering with sulfate aerosols, J. Geophys.305
Res., 114, D14109, doi: 10.1029/2009JD011918.306
Kravitz, B. and A. Robock (2011), The climate effects of high latitude eruptions: The307
role of the time of year, J. Geophys. Res., 116, D01105, doi: 10.1029/2010JD014448.308
Kravitz, B., A. Robock, and D. T. Shindell (2011), Impacts of stratospheric black carbon309
geoengineering on the ozone layer, J. Geophys. Res., submitted.310
Lyon, S. (2007), The Massachusetts 2002 diesel particulate matter inventory, Mas-311
sachusetts Department of Environmental Protection, 123 pp., available online at312
http://www.mass.gov/dep/air/priorities/02dslinv.pdf.313
MacKay & Co. (2003), Americas fleet remains strong, Construction Equipment, August314
2003.315
McClellan, J., J. Sisco, B. Suarez, and G. Keogh (2010), Geoengineering cost analysis,316
Aurora Flight Sciences, AR10-182, 86 pp.317
Medalia, A. I., D. Rivin, and D. R. Sanders (1983), A comparison of carbon black with318
soot, Sci. Tot. Env., 31 (1), 1-22, doi:10.1016/0048-9697(83)90053-0.319
Mills, M. J., O. B. Toon, R. P. Turco, D. E. Kinnison, and R. R. Garcia (2008), Massive320
global ozone loss predicted following regional nuclear conflict, Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci.,321
D R A F T August 21, 2011, 8:52am D R A F T
KRAVITZ ET AL.: BC GEOENGINEERING PRACTICALITY X - 17
105 (14), 5307-5312, doi:10.1073/pnas.0710058105.322
Pressman, J. and P. Warneck (1970), The stratosphere as a chemical sink for carbon323
monoxide, J. Atm. Sci., 27 (1), 155-163.324
Robock, A., L. Oman, G. L. Stenchikov, O. B. Toon, C. Bardeen, and R. P. Turco (2007),325
Climatic consequences of regional nuclear conflicts, Atm. Chem. Phys., 7, 2003-2012,326
doi:10.5194/acp-7-2003-2007.327
Robock, A., L. Oman, and G. L. Stenchikov (2008), Regional climate responses to geo-328
engineering with tropical and Arctic SO2 injections, J. Geophys. Res., 113, D16101,329
doi:10.1029/2008JD010050.330
Robock, A., A. Marquardt, B. Kravitz, and G. Stenchikov (2009), Benefits,331
risks, and costs of stratospheric geoengineering, Geophys. Res. Lett., 36, L19703,332
doi:10.1029/2009GL039209.333
Rose, D., B. Wehner, M. Ketzel, C. Engler, J. Voigtlnder, T. Tuch, and A. Wieden-334
sohler (2006), Atmospheric number size distributions of soot particles and estimation335
of emission factors, Atm. Chem. Phys., 6, 1021-1031, doi:10.5194/acp-6-1021-2006.336
Solomon, S., J. S. Daniel, R. R. Neely III, J. P. Vernier, E. G. Dutton, and L. W. Thomason337
(2011), The persistently variable “background” stratospheric aerosol layer and global338
climate change, Science, doi:10.1126/science.1206027.339
Stern, N. (2006), The economics of climate change: The Stern Review, Executive Sum-340
mary, Her Majestys Treasury, London, UK, 27 pp., available online at http://www.hm-341
treasury.gov.uk/d/Executive Summary.pdf.342
D R A F T August 21, 2011, 8:52am D R A F T
X - 18 KRAVITZ ET AL.: BC GEOENGINEERING PRACTICALITY
Stevenson, D. S., R. M. Doherty, M. G. Sanderson, W. J. Collins, C. E. Johnson, and343
R. G. Derwent (2004), Radiative forcing from aircraft NOx emissions: Mechanisms and344
seasonal dependence, J. Geophys. Res., 109, D17307, doi:10.1029/2004JD004759.345
Stolarski, R. S., et al. (1995), 1995 scientific assessment of the atmospheric effects of346
stratospheric aircraft, NASA reference publication 1381, 105 pp.347
Tilmes, S., R. R. Garcia, D. E. Kinnison, A. Gettelman, and P. J. Rasch (2009), Impact348
of geoengineered aerosols on the troposphere and stratosphere, J. Geophys. Res., 114,349
D12305, doi:10.1029/2008JD011420.350
USAF (2010a), Factsheets: KC-10 Extender, United States351
Air Force Air Mobility Command, available online at352
http://www.af.mil/information/factsheets/factsheet.asp?fsID=109.353
USAF (2010b), Factsheets: KC-135 Stratotanker, United354
States Air Force Air Mobility Command, available online at355
http://www.af.mil/information/factsheets/factsheet.asp?fsID=110.356
USP&E (2010), Why we recommend used diesel generators, U.S. Power357
and Environment, available online at http://www.uspowerco.com/articles/358
why we recommend used diesel generators.359
Watson, A. Y. and P. A. Valberg (2001), Carbon black and soot: Two differ-360
ent substances, AIHAJ - American Industrial Hygiene Association, 62 (2), 218-228,361
doi:10.1080/15298660108984625.362
Weinstock, B. and H. Niki (1972), Carbon monoxide balance in nature, Science,363
176 (4032), 290-292, doi:10.1126/science.176.4032.290.364
D R A F T August 21, 2011, 8:52am D R A F T
KRAVITZ ET AL.: BC GEOENGINEERING PRACTICALITY X - 19
Table 1. Fixed (one-time) and annual costs for geoengineering by combustion of diesel fuel
for each considered combination of diesel engine, airplane, and daily shift number. Included in
the annual costs are an estimate of fuel consumption with an at-the-pump price of US $3.00 per
gallon, for a total of US $94.3 billion. Values reported are rounded to two significant digits.
Engine/Airplane 2920 hours per year 8760 hours per yearFixed Annual Fixed Annual
3516B, KC-135 US $1.3 trillion US $990 billion US $460 billion US $2.8 trillion3516B, KC-10 US $1.4 trillion US $540 billion US $510 billion US $1.4 trillion3406C, KC-135 US $1.6 trillion US $1.2 trillion US $550 billion US $3.4 trillion3406C, KC-10 US $1.8 trillion US $650 billion US $600 billion US $1.7 trillion
Table 2. Significant emissions factors for diesel fuel combustion and carbon black production.
Emissions factors for diesel fuel are from EPA [1996, 2005] and for carbon black from EPA [1995].
All emissions factors are in total number of kg emitted for producing 1 Tg of black carbon aerosol
(diesel fuel combustion) or carbon black. 95% of all carbon black is created by the furnace black
process [Crump, 2000], so we use those emissions factors here. Only emissions factors which were
deemed to be significant products are included.
Emissions factor Diesel fuel Carbon blackCO2 3.2× 1011
NOx 8.5× 109
CO 1.8× 109 1.4× 106
organics (exhaust) 6.8× 108
organics (crankcase) 1.9× 107
PM-10 6.0× 108
SOx 5.7× 108
aldehydes 1.4× 108
H2S 3× 104
CS2 3× 104
OCS 1× 104
CH4 2.5× 104
C2H2 4.5× 104
D R A F T August 21, 2011, 8:52am D R A F T
X - 20 KRAVITZ ET AL.: BC GEOENGINEERING PRACTICALITY
Figure 1. Fixed and annual per-Tg costs of stratospheric geoengineering with black carbon
aerosols. Sulfur gas calculations are repeated from Robock et al. [2009] and are included for
comparison.
D R A F T August 21, 2011, 8:52am D R A F T