If Lovelock cannot spell out the problem clearly, who will?  Or is it just the 
Daily Telegraph at fault - I wouldn't put it past them to distort the message?

I believe that Lovelock does know that geoengineering is going to be the only 
possible way out, with the speed of Arctic sea ice disappearing and open water 
just recorded at the North Pole.  In private correspondence he agreed with me 
that we should be having experimental trials of stratospheric aerosols without 
delay.  He said that the medicine should be tested before we take a strong dose 
- but now he appears to believe that even the medicine could cause very bad 
problems.  But using a medicine with a good chance of success, is surely better 
than letting the patient die.

As the Arctic sea ice disappears, we have accelerated regional warming, and 
with it the meltdown of permafrost, releasing a vast quantity of greenhouse 
gases.  That would inevitably lead to runaway global warming, with no escape 
for the human race.  So letting nature "take its course" is not an option.

If Lovelock can't, who else can spell out the truth of the matter, and make 
people listen?

John

Chiswick, London W4

P.S.  Do we have anybody from Australia or New Zealand on this list?  Please 
email in private.


  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Alvia Gaskill 
  To: [email protected] 
  Sent: Sunday, August 31, 2008 9:22 PM
  Subject: [geo] Lovelock's Upbeat Forecast


  
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/main.jhtml?xml=/earth/2008/08/31/eaclimate231.xml


        Rapid climate change needs a global solution, says scientist

        By Sarah Knapton
        Last Updated: 8:01pm BST 31/08/2008



              Global warming is happening faster than expected and planet-wide 
engineering projects may be needed to buy humans more time, a leading scientist 
has warned.

              James Lovelock of Oxford University says schemes to reflect 
sunlight from the atmosphere or increase the uptake of the greenhouse gas CO2 
by the oceans should be considered to hold back disastrous climate change. 

              But the scientist also warned that such projects may do more harm 
than good and argues the best option could be to let nature take its course. 

              advertisement
              Writing for the Royal Society, Prof Lovelock warned even with 
geo-engineering, any course was "likely to lead to death on a scale that makes 
all wars, famines and disasters small". 

              Yet Prof Lovelock also said carrying on with "business as usual" 
would probably kill most of us this century. Methods proposed for artificially 
altering climate range from using trillions of space craft as a sunshade to 
"seeding" the oceans with iron particles to stimulate algae which absorb CO2. 

              Prof Lovelock last year proposed a system of tubes in the ocean 
to bring cooler, nutrient rich water to the surface to encourage algal blooms 
and carbon dioxide uptake. 

              He even suggested the algae could also provide biofuels and food. 
But he said that geo-engineering schemes could create new problems which would 
require a new fix – trapping the Earth into a cycle problem and solution from 
which there was no escape. 

              Another idea mooted is to send sea spray into the air to make 
existing clouds whiter in order to enable them to reflect more sunlight, in a 
bid to offset the heat trapped by increasing levels of greenhouse gases. 
             


        Information appearing on telegraph.co.uk is the copyright of Telegraph 
Media Group Limited and must not be reproduced in any medium without licence. 
For the full copyright statement see Copyright 
       


  

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"geoengineering" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to