Would it make sense to divide the climate domain into three core subdomains: ocean, land, and air, and add a fourth on the role of cities?
Would that be too broad?
I’m thinking of the next step: developing a future vision for the collection of subdomains we select. A biosphere-based future vision might be so encompassing as to potentially include all sorts of challenges and breakthroughs.
Not necessarily a bad thing, but we’d be delaying narrowing things down.
As many interventions we consider will have effects in multiple arenas, be they on broad physical, architectural or cultural arenas as Sevag suggests or other ones, it is probably better to subdomain by the proposed class of method or intervention itself. As an example, deploying my ice thickening Ice Shield technology would affect: the cryosphere (refreezing the Arctic), atmosphere/climate (influencing precipitation, overturning currents and heat radiation off-planet), marine biosphere (restoring polar habitat, sequestering carbon and oxygenating the water column), land (by countering sea level rise), increasing polar albedo, and reducing seabed GHG emissions.
This is a really good point. The issue is that how do we preconceive of different categories of intervention prior to identifying the challenges that need to be addressed. The need for subdomains is primarily to divide up a very large domain into meaningful focus areas within which identified challenges are then approached with solutions or breakthroughs.
Thanks, Sevag. Should subdomaining be regarded as particularly useful, then I see three main options:
By broad classification, whilst recognising that many of the proposed methods will have effects in more than one classification. Classifications might include Solar Radiation Management (SRM), Thermal Radiation Management (TRM), Greenhouse Gas Removal (GGR) that would include Carbon Dioxide Removal (CDR) and Greenhouse Gas Destruction (GGD), such as atmospheric methane oxidation, Mitigation that might include Energy Efficiency measures, and possibly Adaptation.
The second option is to classify by physical domain, namely atmosphere, terrasphere (which includes soil and lithosphere), aquasphere (oceans, lakes, rivers and possibly aquifers), cryosphere and exosphere (space).
The third option is to classify by solution or method, which I have a mild preference for because all areas (see above) and all effects, including physical, biological, economic, social and political can be countenanced under the one heading. Different methods can also be used in concert, successively or in different locations, intensities and times in order to have better overall effects. than each on its own.
Excellent points! Worth considering all of these different approaches…
I agree with @Sev’s views on the issue. It seems better to focus on the problems we want to solve, than on the medium in which the solutions are expected to work in.