NASA searches for climate solutions as global temperatures reach record highs

NASA experts stand in a dark room with Earth visualizations to show the impacts of climate change.
NASA experts stand in a room with high-tech data visualization software representing climate change statistics. (Image credit: NASA)

NASA scientists opened a discussion on Thursday (July 20) to outline key solutions they've been working on to mitigate the dire effects of global warming. 

As heat waves continue to sweep across Earth, wildfires burn across North America and natural disasters like hurricanes increase in severity – all consequences of human-induced climate change – the space agency is paying attention and looking for ways it can help mitigate the effects of a warming planet. "This last June was the warmest June on record," Gavin Schmidt, director of NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies, said. "And we anticipate, with the understanding of what's going on, on a day by day basis, that July is likely to be the warmest absolute month on record." 

To be clear, that's a record that goes back many hundreds, if not thousands, of years, he said. 

While Schmidt and fellow presenters pointed out quite a few of NASA's endeavors to combat climate change, some highlights included missions to improve our understanding of how global warming is changing biological systems, looking into next-gen technologies like unmanned aircraft to monitor wildfire response mechanisms and deploying satellites to track greenhouse gas emissions across the globe. 

Related: NASA highlights climate research at opening of inaugural summit

Another recurring theme of the discussion was the importance of generating pristine climate data that's available to the public, researchers and policymakers with the power to make a difference. 

There was even some preliminary talk about how artificial intelligence and deep learning could aid the agency with getting climate data that's as precise and accurate as possible, but the team emphasized how such mechanisms are still very much in-the-works. 

"Our science isn't done until we've communicated it," Karen St. Germain, director of NASA's Earth Science Division, said. "This has never been more important or compelling than it is today. NASA Earth Science is end-to-end capability from technology all the way through what the observations mean, today and into the future. That end to end capability allows us the opportunity to deliver actionable science and information so more people can see the Earth as we see it."

"You think of NASA as a space agency; you think of NASA as an aeronautical agency," NASA administrator Bill Nelson said, "NASA is also a climate agency."

This sentiment grew clear as a variety of experts in marine science, aeronautical engineering and environmental studies spoke during the conference about the immediacy with which climate change must be handled.

"The heat waves that we're seeing in the U.S., in Europe and in China are demolishing records left, right and center," Schmidt said. "There has been decade on decade of increasing temperatures – throughout the last four decades." In fact, Gavin suggested 2023 may prove to be the hottest year on record and 2024 will more than likely take that grim title. 

NASA isn't only focused on managing the crisis in order to protect humanity, but also to aid species on land and in sea. 

"The waters around Florida are over 90 degrees Fahrenheit, which is extremely complicated for marine species like coral reefs, marine plants and marine animals," Carlos Del Castillo, chief of the Ocean Ecology Laboratory at NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center, said. "And all the CO2 we're putting into the air is causing that temperature – a lot of it goes into the ocean." 

To put this into perspective, he says we have increased the acidity of the ocean by about 25% since the Industrial Revolution. 

"Pretty much everywhere, particularly in the oceans, we've been seeing record-breaking sea-surface temperatures – even outside of the tropics," Schmidt said. "We anticipate that is going to continue, and the reason why is because we continue to put greenhouse gasses into the atmosphere. Until we stop doing that, temperatures will keep on rising."

A methane plume 3 miles long (4.8 km) seen in the atmosphere over Tehran, Iran was traced back to a major landfill by NASA's EMIT experiment on the International Space Station.  (Image credit: NASA/JPL-Caltech)

NASA's upcoming PACE mission, slated to launch in early 2024, as well its GLIMR mission, currently expected to begin the following year, will hopefully help scientists decipher how to tackle that marine issue. 

Both are satellite-based systems, but PACE, which stands for Plankton, Aerosol, Cloud, ocean Ecosystem, will be more focused on detecting ocean color changes, clouds and aerosols while GLIMR, which stands for Geostationary Littoral Imaging and Monitoring Radiometer, will identify things like harmful algal blooms and oil spills. 

The two, however, are thought to work in conjunction with one another to paint a full picture of how climate change is affecting our oceans and the organisms within. 

They'll add to the over two dozen climate-related missions NASA already has in orbit, such as the Orbiting Carbon Observatories 2 and 3 which measured greenhouse gas emissions stemming from Europe's largest coal-fired power plant earlier this year.  

"Why should we care?" Del Castillo said, "Well, these little marine plants are at the bottom of the food web. They produce about 50% of the oxygen that we are breathing – and, of course, the ocean helps modulate the weather." 

In the realm of spaceflight, Huy Tran, aeronautics director at NASA’s Ames Research Center touched on some of the green technologies and sustainable aviation propulsion mechanisms the agency intends to develop for various forms of air travel. 

"Last year, the Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate initiated a sustainable flying National Partnership," Tran said, referring to one of NASA's aviation research organizations, "This initiative allowed us to accelerate and make good progress on net zero aviation by 2050." 

Some ideas brought up for sustainable flying include fully electric aircraft and a way to ensure reduced fuel burn for commercial aviation. Tran also discussed the possibility of creating unmanned drones and aircraft to take care of wildfires without risking lives. 

Further, by partnering with organizations such as FEMA and NOAA, Tom Wagner, associate director for Earth Action, said the agency hopes to identify what society's needs are with regard to actionable climate change solutions.

"What we know from science is that human activity and principally greenhouse gas emissions are unequivocally causing the warming that we're seeing on our planet," Kate Calvin, NASA chief scientist and senior climate adviser, said. 

"And this is impacting people and ecosystems around the world."

Join our Space Forums to keep talking space on the latest missions, night sky and more! And if you have a news tip, correction or comment, let us know at: community@space.com.

Monisha Ravisetti
Astronomy Channel Editor

Monisha Ravisetti is Space.com's Astronomy Editor. She covers black holes, star explosions, gravitational waves, exoplanet discoveries and other enigmas hidden across the fabric of space and time. Previously, she was a science writer at CNET, and before that, reported for The Academic Times. Prior to becoming a writer, she was an immunology researcher at Weill Cornell Medical Center in New York. She graduated from New York University in 2018 with a B.A. in philosophy, physics and chemistry. She spends too much time playing online chess. Her favorite planet is Earth.

  • Frank Sterle Jr
    I was left feeling I could never again complain about the weather being too cold after having suffered the unprecedented heatwave here in late June 2021, described by meteorologists as a ‘stalling dome’ of high heat, that resulted in 619 confirmed heat-related deaths.

    But then complain I did when most of the province, including southwestern B.C., suffered an unprecedently cold bunch of days in January, which was described by meteorologists as a ‘stalling dome’ of freezing cold.

    I doubt it was just coincidental; rather, such extremes are basically due to climate change via human-caused global warming via morbidly massive amounts of fossil fuel consumption ever since the Industrial Revolution.

    Basic commonsense dictates that it is no longer prudent to have so much of society, including our primary modes of transportation, reliant on traditional sources of energy.

    Yet, if the universal availability of green-energy alternatives will come at the profit-margin expense of traditional ‘energy’ production companies, one can expect formidable obstacles, including the political and regulatory sort.

    In this world, if something notably conflicts with corporate interests, even very progressive motions are greatly resisted, often enough successfully.
    Reply
  • Ken Fabian
    With emissions at highest levels ever and atmospheric concentrations still rising we have to expect the real world impacts to get stronger. A wide variety of Earth observation satellites are confirming a wide variety of real world impacts. Not one shows anything that "disproves" it.

    The worse case scenarios are deemed less likely because there is global action to reduce emissions but all the low range outcomes are dependent on serious efforts that don't lag. Even though most new electricity generation being built is now renewables and commercial SMRs are edging closer to viability it is clear we are lagging, in large part because there are influential interests hard at work to defend the "right" to keep profiting from fossil fuels without climate accountability - counting the benefits but not the harms - whilst promoting alarmist economic fear of energy poverty and associating support for climate action with political extremists to entrench popular opposition to commitments to zero emissions.
    Reply
  • comforteagle
    Do you reallllly need our help to stop greenhouse emissions _right_ now? And. Would it also be really helpful if the world's scientists had access to every zero point energy 'thing' to help us do that ASAP?
    Reply
  • Frank Sterle Jr
    Ken Fabian said:
    With emissions at highest levels ever and atmospheric concentrations still rising we have to expect the real world impacts to get stronger. A wide variety of Earth observation satellites are confirming a wide variety of real world impacts. Not one shows anything that "disproves" it.

    The worse case scenarios are deemed less likely because there is global action to reduce emissions but all the low range outcomes are dependent on serious efforts that don't lag. Even though most new electricity generation being built is now renewables and commercial SMRs are edging closer to viability it is clear we are lagging, in large part because there are influential interests hard at work to defend the "right" to keep profiting from fossil fuels without climate accountability - counting the benefits but not the harms - whilst promoting alarmist economic fear of energy poverty and associating support for climate action with political extremists to entrench popular opposition to commitments to zero emissions.
    Interviewed by the online National Observer (posted February 12, 2019), Noam Chomsky emphasized that in Tucson, Arizona, for example, “the sun is shining … most of the year, take a look and see how many solar panels you see. Our house in the suburbs is the only one that has them .

    "People are complaining that they have a thousand-dollar electric bill per month over the summer for air conditioning but won’t put up a solar panel; and in fact the Tucson electric company makes it hard to do.

    "For example, our solar panel has some of the panels missing because you’re not allowed to produce too much electricity … People have to come to understand that they’ve just got to , and fast; and it doesn’t harm them, it improves their lives. ...

    “But just the psychological barrier that says I … have to keep to the common beliefs and that is somehow a radical thing that we have to be scared of, is a block that has to be overcome by constant educational organizational activity.”
    Reply
  • Unclear Engineer
    There is a problem with electric companies determining how much solar power you can produce. They don't want to buy it, especially at prices set by the government to encourage private home owners to install it.

    What we need is a group that is looking at engineering solutions to the overall societal problem of needing to electrify just about everything, and still provide reliable electric power to those things. Then, proper policies can be set on who can and can't do what to achieve that overall objective. Right now, we are having politicians make policies that are too often actually counter-productive to getting us to where we intend to be.

    Part of the problem with homeowners getting to install solar is that it is very expensive to do by just paying for it straight-out, and so it is subsidized. But that subsidy comes with rules that are politically set to favor installers and electric companies.

    It seems to me that the optimum system is going to involve mostly locally generated power during the day, and grid delivered power during the nights (or blizzards or storm aftermaths). Presently, homeowners who lose grid connections also lose their access to the power generated by the solar cells on their own property. That tends to make people less interested in getting solar power. They are essentially only letting the electric company use their real estate for an offset to their electric bills. If the company can't get the electrical power from their cells, the they don't want the residents to be able to use it, either. That actually means that a home with a lot of solar cells would also install an emergency generator for when the grid goes down.

    And, if we really do get most of our energy uses to be electrically powered, the grid may be overloading and go down rather frequently. That is not going to help getting people to agree to give up fuel powered equipment (cars, stoves, home heating, etc.) And, it will not help getting politicians reelected who favor converting everything to electric power.

    A lot of the hesitation on acceptance and the political push back comes from people not trusting the advocates to be smart enough or even honest about what the future will be like if we all just do what they say we should do. What we need is an actual demonstration, with transparent costs and benefits - not introduction subsidies that are planned to go away as soon as the masses start following the early adopters.
    Reply
  • Helio
    Here is an excellent assessment of the temperature anomalies we are experiencing. CO2 isn't likely the culprit.

    "The exceptionally warm global temperature in 2023 is part of a trend of warming since 2015 that is associated primarily with greater absorption of solar radiation in the earth-atmosphere system. This increase in absorbed solar radiation is driven by a slow decline in springtime snow extent, but primary by a reduction in reflection from the atmosphere driven by reduced cloudiness and to a lesser extent a reduction in atmospheric aerosol. Any increase in the greenhouse effect from increasing CO2 (which impacts the longwave radiation budget) is lost in the noise.

    El Nino and La Nina introduce strong interannual variability into the top-of-atmosphere and surface energy balances. Against this strong background of interannual variability, there is discernible evidence of the impact of the change in ship aerosols primarily in the mid latitudes of the Northern Hemisphere. The impacts of Hunga Tonga in the stratosphere are primarily expected to occur in the winter hemisphere, because of cancelling of longwave and shortwave effects in the summer hemisphere."

    The next few months should provide more interesting data.
    Reply