Dear Alan, Perhaps not everybody on this forum thinks that geoengineering is a good idea, but is there an alternative for saving the Arctic sea ice? Does anybody have an alternative? Clearly emissions reduction cannot act in the necessary timescale, with the sea ice threatening to disappear at end summer 2013 or sooner according to some experts.
And hoping that we can recover the situation, once the sea ice has disappeared, is surely extraordinarily risky. We might not know that we'd passed a "point of no return" until we had! Cheers from Chiswick, John ----- Original Message ----- From: "Alan Robock" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Oliver Wingenter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: "geoengineering" <[email protected]> Sent: Sunday, December 07, 2008 9:25 PM Subject: [geo] Re: Can't Get There from Here Dear Oliver, I agree with everything in your message, except your claim that "We seek through geoengineering to reduce or reverse some of these side effects." I would say, rather, "We seek to discuss geoengineering, whether and how it could be used to reduce or reverse some of these side effects, and to evaluate both its potential benefits and problems." Your statement is that everyone on this forum has agreed that geoengineering is a good idea, and that is not the case. 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: [EMAIL PROTECTED] New Brunswick, NJ 08901-8551 USA http://envsci.rutgers.edu/~robock On Sun, 7 Dec 2008, Oliver Wingenter wrote: > > Dear David, > > Your arguments remind me about how Fred Singer tried to convince us > that CFC where not harmful to stratospheric ozone. He ended up > wasting a lot of people?s time such as Sherry Rowland?s, Ralph > Cicerone, Mike Prather and others by refuting his articles. > > However, to reiterate Ken's email, the premise of this group is global > warming is causing climate change. We seek through geoengineering to > reduce or reverse some of these side effects such as Arctic ice > melting, sea level rise, etc. It is my opinion that your discussions > on whether or not the Earth's temperature is rising or not, although > of interest to many, belongs in another forum. I cannot afford to > spend any more time discussing issues outside of geoengineering with > you in this Google group. > > Sincerely, > > Oliver Wingenter > > > On Dec 6, 2:33 pm, "David Schnare" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Oliver and Mike: >> >> I'm a climate change agnostic, and am openly supportive of Geo-Nurtring, >> including activities such as solar radiation management and rebalancing >> the >> carbon cycle, which would surely include energy conservation. >> >> The problem I have faced comes when someone like Prof. Jagadish Shukla, >> Ph.D., at the Center for Ocean, Land and Atmospheric Studies, attempted >> to >> undermine my promotion of research on solar radiation management by >> claiming >> that the scientific underpinning is too uncertain to allow its use. My >> response argument is that the identical GCMs used to project climate >> change >> are used to project the effects of solar radiation management. Then, >> individuals with a dog in this fight argue that, indeed, all the >> projections >> are too uncertain to provide a firm basis for the kinds of actions >> climate >> alarmist demand. >> >> My view is that all this uncertainty should result in application of the >> policy paradigm typically used to address potential, but perhaps not yet >> manifest threats public health - the insurance paradigm. This approach >> requires development of tools for use when the threat is manifest, but >> otherwise only marginal responses until the uncertainties can be brought >> into reasonable limits. [And, Ken, that is why this discussion is not >> about >> whether climate change can or should be attributed to mankind, which we >> all >> agree should be on some other discussion platform, but rather is about >> the >> quality of the science needed to support actions, including solar >> radiation >> management with large, deep and broad economic consequences, both >> positive >> and negative.) >> >> Mike MacCracken is completely correct with regard to some of the >> uncertainties. There do appear to be systematic feedbacks that would >> prevent a 100 deg. C temperature increase or decrease. Indeed, some argue >> that the feedbacks would prevent anything more than 10 deg shifts. >> Nevertheless, it's the 2 to 5 deg C shifts that concern me, and our >> uncertainty as to whether these will arise (in either direction, by the >> way, >> as the adverse effects of a significant drop in temperature are >> potentially >> as bad as a similar increase). The uncertainty remains so large that I >> don't see a basis to apply anything other than the insurance paradigm >> (which, by the way, reflects the precautionary principle, but is not >> hostage >> to that principle). >> >> Finally, for those of you interested in the Huntsville program, perhaps >> John >> Christy's work is the more accessible material. He heads the program and >> Roy Spencer is one of his staff. Here's a list of John's relevant >> publications on the temperature data set, leading off with the ones that >> discuss the relationship of the Huntsville data to that of other sources, >> and to projections. Note, although they spend a great deal of time >> measuring tropospheric temperatures, they measure and report surface >> temperatures for both land and ocean in their data sets. >> >> Cheers, >> David. >> >> Pubs link:http://www.nsstc.uah.edu/atmos/christy_pubs.html >> >> * Christy, J.R. and R.W.Spencer, 2005: Correcting temperature data sets. >> Science, 310, 972. >> >> * Douglass, D.H., J.R. Christy, B.D. Pearson and S.F. Singer, 2007: A >> comparison of tropical temperature trends with model predictions. >> International J. Climatology, DOI: 10.1002/joc.1651. >> (pdf)<http://www.nsstc.uah.edu/atmos/christy/2007_Dougless_etal.pdf> >> >> * Christy, J.R. and W.B. Norris, 2006: Satellite and VIZ-Radiosonde >> intercomparisons for diagnosis on non-climatic influences. J. Atmos. Oc. >> Tech., 23, 1181 ? 1194. >> >> * Spencer, R.W., J.R. Christy, W.D. Braswell and W.B. Norris, 2006: >> Estimation of tropospheric temperature trends from MSU channels 2 and 4. >> J. >> Atmos. Oc. Tech., 23, 417-423. >> >> * Christy, J.R., 2006: The ever-changing climate system. Cumberland Law >> Review, 36 No. 3, 493-504, >> >> * Christy, J.R., W.B. Norris, K. Redmond and K. Gallo, 2006: Methodology >> and >> results of calculating central California surface temperature trends: >> Evidence of human-induced climate change? J. Climate, 19, 548-563. >> >> * Christy, J.R. and R.W.Spencer, 2005: Correcting temperature data sets. >> Science, 310, 972. >> >> * Christy, J.R. and W.B. Norris, 2004: What may we conclude about >> tropospheric temperature trends? Geophys. Res. Lett., 31, No. 6, L0621. >> >> * Christy, J.R. and R.W. Spencer, 2003: Reliability of satellite data >> sets. >> Science, 301, 1046-1047. >> >> * Christy, J.R., 2003: Climate Research - Response to "Wanted Scientific >> Leadership on Climate" by Pielke, Jr. and Sarewitz. Issues in Science and >> Technology. Spring 2003, 9-10. >> >> * Christy, J.R., R.W. Spencer, W.B. Norris, W.D. Braswell and D.E. >> Parker, >> 2003: Error estimates of Version 5.0 of MSU/AMSU bulk atmospheric >> temperatures. J. Atmos. Oceanic Tech. 20, 613-629. >> >> * Christy, J.R., 2002: When was the hottest summer? A State Climatologist >> struggles for an answer. Bull. Amer. Met. Soc. 83, 723-734. >> >> * Christy, J.R., D.E. Parker, S.J. Brown, I. Macadam, M. Stendel and W.B. >> Norris, 2001: Differential trends in tropical sea surface and atmospheric >> temperatures. Geophys. Res. Lett. 28, 183-186. >> >> * Winter, A., O. Tadamichi, H. Ishioroshi, T. Watanabe and J. R. Christy, >> 2000: A two-to-three degree cooling of Caribbean sea surface temperatures >> during the Little Ice Age. Geophys. Res. Lett., 27, 3365-3368. >> >> * Hurrell, J., S.J. Brown, K.E. Trenberth and J.R. Christy, 2000: >> Comparison >> of tropospheric temperatures from radiosondes and satellites: 1979-1998. >> Bull. Amer. Met. Soc., 81, 2165-2177. >> >> * Gaffen, D.J., B.D. Santer, J.S. Boyle, J.R. Christy, N.E. Graham, R.J. >> Ross, 2000: Multidecadal changes in the vertical structure of the >> tropical >> troposphere. Science, 287, 1242-1245. >> >> * Christy, J.R., 2000: Global Climate Change: Scientific and Social >> Impacts. >> Bridges. 7, 39-57. >> >> * Christy, J.R., R.W. Spencer, and W.D. Braswell, 2000: MSU Tropospheric >> temperatures: Data set construction and radiosonde comparisons. J. Atmos. >> Oceanic Tech. 17,1153-1170. >> >> * Stendel, M., J.R. Christy and L. Bengtsson, 2000: Assessing levels of >> uncertainty in recent temperature time series. Climate Dynamics, 16(8), >> 587-601. >> * Christy, J.R., R.W. Spencer, and E. Lobl, 1998 Analysis of the merging >> procedure for the MSU daily temperature time series. J. Climate, 11, >> 2016-2041. >> >> * Christy, J.R., R.W. Spencer, and D. Braswell, 1997 How accurate are >> satellite 'thermometers'?, Nature, 389, 342-3. >> >> * Christy, J.R. , 1995 Temperature above the surface layer. Climatic >> Change >> , 30, 455-474. >> >> * Christy, J.R., R.W. Spencer and R.T. McNider, 1995 Reducing noise in >> the >> MSU daily lower tropospheric global temperature data set. J Climate , 8, >> 888-896. >> >> * Christy, J.R. and J. Goodridge, 1995 Precision global temperatures from >> satellites and urban warming effects of non-satellite data. Atmos. Env. >> 29, >> 1957-1961. >> >> * Christy, J.R. and R. T. McNider, 1994 Satellite greenhouse signal. >> Nature, >> 367, 325. >> >> * Christy, J.R. and S.J. Drouilhet, 1994 Variability in daily, zonal mean >> lower-stratospheric temperatures. J. Climate, 7, 106-120. >> >> On Sat, Dec 6, 2008 at 12:59 PM, Oliver Wingenter < >> >> [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >>> Dear David, >> >>> The prudent and conservative to do is to be cautious and try and >>> maintain the status quo, which is our present climate or one not too >>> long ago. It does know one in this country (well a lawyer could argue >>> against this) any harm to conserve energy. It helps them personally, >>> the countries trade imbalance and slows CO2 build up. >> >>> I went to the University Alabama Huntsville web site and could not >>> find in the Huntsville temperature record you mentioned is better than >>> the analysis of Hansen and his collaborators. If this work were so >>> important, they would let it shine like a beacon. I think we need to >>> continue to move away from the fringes of science, as this is killing >>> precious time on real issue like solving our climate problem. >> >>> Sincerely, >> >>> Oliver Wingenter >> >>> On Dec 6, 9:24 am, "David Schnare" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>>> Mike: >> >>>> I'm going to ignor your ad hominem attacks, as that is the ground rule >>> for >>>> this group. >> >>>> The article raises the point of what happens when a feedback mechanism >>>> multiplies error. I did not cite to the entire article, but only that >>>> portion that properly reflects the error bands in projecting 100 years >>> into >>>> the future with these models. It is an appropriate analysis for honest >>>> scientists, and the IPCC does no such analysis whatever. If you want to >>>> take issue with it, then do a proper error analysis and let us see it. >>> I'm >>>> not sure you have the expertise to do that, but I'm fairly sure you >>>> could >>>> find or fund someone to do it for you. >> >>>> In the mean time, if you want to argue the matter of cloud feedbacks, >>>> and >>>> good lord someone should, considering the massive impact of the >>>> feedback >>>> assumption for clouds and the error that the feedback assumption >>> propogates >>>> within GCMs, then come on over to EPA, as described below, and take on >>> Dick >>>> Lindzen. He will be explaining his concerns about the projection of >>>> temperature under uncertainty of the feedback effects of clouds. In >>> fact, >>>> I'll keep a careful watch for you and will take close notes that I can >>> share >>>> with the group so they can have a second hand view of your destruction >>>> of >>>> Lindzen's science and credibility all in one. *December 9, 2008 Seminar >>>> (Tuesday) - 1:30 PM - Room 1117A EPA East* Topic: "Global Warming: What >>> Is >>>> It All About?" Speaker: Richard Lindzen (MIT) >> >>>> Here's the most recent electronic flyer on these sessions. Anyone in >>>> the >>>> Washington, D.C. area is welcome. You only need to call the contact >>> person >>>> to get access to the session. >> >>>> EPA's National Center for Environmental Economics (NCEE) will host our >>> next >>>> Climate Economics seminar >> >> ... >> >> read more ยป > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
