Hi all, Trying to track down Prof Hansen, I accidentally discovered that he is speaking at a conference tomorrow. Is anybody going to the conference, or do you know anybody? I'd like to check he's received my email, and is going to reply!
Will Prof Hansen mention geoengineering (namely carbon stock management) as a "top strategy" for reducing atmospheric carbon dioxide? Will he mention what reducing carbon dioxide will NOT do - such as saving Arctic sea ice, for which we need a different kind of geoengineering (namely solar radiation management)? Re conference details, this is from "The Switch" - ANPED's newsletter: ---- Upcoming Events - May 2009 2 May 2009, Columbia University, New York City, United States 350 Climate Conference. This event will bring together significant figures from within the climate debate including keynote speaker Dr. James Hansen, Director of NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies. The conference will critically examine the question of "What is the safe upper limit of atmospheric carbon dioxide?" as well as explore the top strategies for reducing atmospheric carbon dioxide. http://www.350conference.org ---- Cheers from Chiswick, John ----- Original Message ----- From: "John Nissen" <j...@cloudworld.co.uk> To: "James Hansen" <j...@columbia.edu>; "James Hansen" <jhan...@giss.nasa.gov> Cc: "'geoengineering'" <geoengineering@googlegroups.com>; <brian.laun...@manchester.ac.uk>; <miliba...@parliament.uk>; "Alan Robock" <rob...@envsci.rutgers.edu>; <will...@parliament.uk>; "Dr Tim Fox" <t_...@imeche.org> Sent: Thursday, April 30, 2009 6:54 PM Subject: NASA help on geoengineering, please, Professor Hansen > > Dear Professor Hansen, > > Congratulations on your noble efforts to persuade our UK government to > adopt CCS, which have now borne fruit [1]. However, if it becomes > generally recognised that drastic global emissions reduction, even with > CCS, would be insufficient to halt Arctic warming and sea ice retreat (in > turn threatening massive methane release and Greenland ice sheet > disintegration), then there may be panic measures taken with > geoengineering. The geoengineering is likely to involve stratospheric > sulphate aerosols [2]. But measures taken in panic can be dangerous. > There has been insufficient experimentation with the aerosols, and, > according to Alan Robock (see email below), the aerosol effect is > difficult to observe except with full-scale deployment. In particular he > is concerned that none of the SAGE satellites, used to measure aerosols > from volcanoes in the past, may be currently available. > > Would it be possible for NASA to help in aerosol experimentation, or at > least in setting up aerosol observation systems, as a matter of urgency? > > Note that there has been no public funding for research into > geoengineering in the UK or US [3]. However I gather Mr Holdren considers > that geoengineering should not be ruled out [4], so you might have a > better chance in the US. > > Kind regards, > > John Nissen, > Chiswick, London W4 > > [1] > http://www.businessgreen.com/business-green/news/2240988/coal-without-ccs-uk-miliband > [2] > http://rsta.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/366/1882/4007.short?rss=1&ssource=mfc > [3] > http://www.imeche.org/NR/rdonlyres/5EEE7C72-4439-4E6D-B6DB-17DBE06C4264/0/GeoEngineeringIMechEPolicy.pdf > [4] > http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/apr/08/geo-engineering-john-holdren > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Alan Robock" <rob...@envsci.rutgers.edu> > To: "Eugene I. Gordon" <euggor...@comcast.net> > Cc: <wf...@utk.edu>; <j...@cloudworld.co.uk>; "'geoengineering'" > <geoengineering@googlegroups.com>; <brian.laun...@manchester.ac.uk> > Sent: Wednesday, April 29, 2009 4:56 PM > Subject: Re: [geo] Re: Balancing the pros and cons of geoengineering > > >> Dear Gene, >> >> The problem with a small controlled experiment of stratospheric >> geoengineering is that you would not be able to measure either the >> resulting aerosol cloud or the climate effects. In fact, nature has done >> this for us. The Kasatochi volcano in Alaska erupted in August, 2008, >> putting 1.5 Tg SO2 into the lower stratosphere. Climate model >> experiments and observations both show that the effects were too small to >> detect above weather variability. The only way to test the climate >> effects of stratospheric geoengineering is to actually do it full-scale. >> >> Furthermore, we have no means to inject the SO2 if we wanted to. >> >> Furthermore, existing observing systems for stratospheric aerosols are >> difficult to use. The SAGE satellites are no longer working. There is a >> spare SAGE III on the shelf at NASA, but there are no plans to launch it. >> Calipso lidar can make episodic measurements along very narrow tracks, >> but cannot measure the properties we want, like size distribution. >> >> We could start to design injection systems, such as from airplanes, and >> test how well they produce small aerosol clouds, but how they would work >> injecting SO2 or H2S into existing stratospheric clouds could not be >> tested, except theoretically. Even if we can inject the precursor gases, >> can we create particles of the desired size distribution? >> >> Alan >> >> Alan Robock, Professor II >> Director, Meteorology Undergraduate Program >> Associate Director, Center for Environmental Prediction >> Department of Environmental Sciences Phone: +1-732-932-9800 x6222 >> Rutgers University Fax: +1-732-932-8644 >> 14 College Farm Road E-mail: rob...@envsci.rutgers.edu >> New Brunswick, NJ 08901-8551 USA http://envsci.rutgers.edu/~robock [snip] --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "geoengineering" group. To post to this group, send email to geoengineering@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to geoengineering+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
